develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from November 2017

Re: Revisiting smart match

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Zefram
Date:
November 22, 2017 19:29
Subject:
Re: Revisiting smart match
Message ID:
20171122192915.GZ4913@fysh.org
Sawyer X wrote:
>We haven't resolved smart match yet and I think it just might be time,
>long enough before 5.28, to revisit this topic and reach a decision.

I have implemented a simplification based on the consensus reached
in recent mail threads.  It's on branch zefram/dumb_match.  It's the
minimalistic version, specifically:

* given() has no implicit enreferencement, only regular scalar context

* when() has no implicit enreferencement, only regular scalar context

* when() never implicitly smartmatches, only uses arg as truth value

* ~~ has no implicit enreferencement, only regular scalar context

* ~~ has rhs overloading as the only matching mechanism

We can sensibly apply this for 5.28, and I think we should.  While not
necessarily the final form in which we'll want the smartmatch features
to be, this is clearly going to be quite close to the eventual form.
It's a big step forward in the experiment.

If we end up wanting any more complicated behaviour than this, it's
probably better to add them onto this clean minimal setup than to have
another attempt at cutting out only the bits we don't want.  Of the
various features being dropped, the only one that I found really
conspicuous by its absence was the shorthand for smartmatching in
"when".  If we want to add such a shorthand back, it should be alongside
the truth-value-argument arrangement, distinguished syntactically.
I currently think the best spelling would be "when~($matcher)".
(We'd also have the option of a parallel "if~($matcher)" syntax.)

I didn't change the behaviour of "break" or loop control features.
If FC wants to change that, that can happen fairly independently of what
I've done.  (FC should not wait for a counter-proposal from whichever
ex-pumpking he was referring to.)  I have no strong feelings about
FC's proposal there.  We shouldn't hold up simplifying the things I've
addressed in order to wait for a resolution of loop control.

-zefram

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About