develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from February 2021

Re: De-experimentalising "signatures"

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Felipe Gasper
Date:
February 15, 2021 13:32
Subject:
Re: De-experimentalising "signatures"
Message ID:
07BC2B9C-8FD4-4436-BDE9-32328F389390@felipegasper.com


> On Feb 15, 2021, at 7:35 AM, Dave Mitchell <davem@iabyn.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 04:54:48PM +0000, Paul "LeoNerd" Evans wrote:
>> I know Dave M has plans to add lots more things (type assertions,
>> generic query syntax, named variables, etc...) and I'm excited about
>> and definitely want to see many of those things. But I don't know of
>> any firm reason why signatures in their current form need to be marked
>> "experimental" to do so.
> 
> I have pushed for keeping them experimental because I want to change
> things so that @_ isn't populated in signatured subs (or more precisely @_
> isn't localised and is still the @_ of the caller), and that breaks
> backwards compatibility. It's also dependent on other new signature
> features being added which do away with needing access to @_.
> 
> But I'm not currently in a good enough head space to commit to working on
> signatures. I'm finding it difficult even to keep up with p5p emails, let
> alone do any new work.

What if, as an expedient, access to @_ in signature’d functions triggered an exception? (I don’t know enough of the internals to sense whether that’s easier or harder than what Dave wants.)

-F


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