Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2020
Re: chained comparisons
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans
Date:
March 13, 2020 10:12
Subject:
Re: chained comparisons
Message ID:
20200313101237.514edc37@shy.leonerd.org.uk
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 00:07:51 +0000
Zefram via perl5-porters <perl5-porters@perl.org> wrote:
> Sawyer X wrote:
> >What I am wondering is how far can these semantics be stretched.
>
> There's no way it could do more than one would expect. It's not
> open-ended, doesn't interact with many other features, and only
> interacts with other features in very well-defined ways.
I've been quiet on this thread so far but my $0.02 is:
This feature seems good, fills an obvious gap in existing syntax and is
well-defined, limited in scope and very unlikely to break anything
either now, or in the future. It doesn't limit us to anything else we'd
need to support around it. It doesn't feel like it needs to be
experimental as there really are no degrees of freedom left in it with
which to experiment.
In summary: I vote it be added as it stands, un-experimentally.
--
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans
leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next