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

Re: smartmatch/switch deprecation for 5.28

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Renee B
Date:
December 30, 2017 18:23
Subject:
Re: smartmatch/switch deprecation for 5.28
Message ID:
2c2bdcb2-6dbe-fb05-e6a3-86d608670d4e@perl-services.de
Am 30.12.2017 um 18:48 schrieb Leon Timmermans:
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Elizabeth Mattijsen <liz@dijkmat.nl> wrote:
>>> On 30 Dec 2017, at 18:16, Zefram <zefram@fysh.org> wrote:
>>> Leon Timmermans wrote:
>>>> Why would our end-users want that?
>>> They'd want a deprecation to give them notice to rewrite their code
>>> for portability across the smartmatch change.  They'd want the process
>>> of changing smartmatch to move forward so that they can get a language
>>> feature that's coherent and usable and which p5p is willing to maintain.
>> Isn’t the issue really that most people think the language feature is already coherent and usable enough for them to use in their code for over a decade?
> Yes, that!
>
> Smartmatch as a whole is clearly insane. The part that people actually
> use not so much (except the string/number thing; but that can be dealt
> with). Breaking that because of the parts that no one ever uses is
> throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
>
> Why would anyone want that?
>
> Leon

+1


In my opinion, an experiment should be evaluated. What was successful,
what should be marked as failed.
Successful stuff should be kept and failed stuff should be removed or
changed. What are the "costs" for
the feature (is it maintainable?...).

And Leon mentioned earlier that the users could/should be asked. Would
that help?

Renée

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