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

Re: on changing perl's behavior

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Christian Walde
March 30, 2021 09:40
Re: on changing perl's behavior
Message ID:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 05:07:37 +0200, Ricardo Signes <> wrote:

> These second two futures are built with heavy investment in the difference between typing boilerplate and no >boilerplate.  We already have a means to say "get the best Perl you can get," and it's something like:
> use v5.32.0; use warnings; use utf8; no feature 'switch';
> use if $USER eq 'rjbs',
>  experimental => qw(const_attr declared_refs refaliasing re_strict regex_sets >signatures);
> Even that first line is a bunch.  Plausibly, it can all be boiled down to "use vX;" with a bit of doing.  Then we get into >the space between boilerplate being "use vX" and being nothing.

Another point here i want to see mentioned:

I want future Perls to be as bold as possible. I want Perl v7 to change as much as it humanly can. I want it to be brutal, a sledge hammer. I want it to include every possible default change we can remotely justify. I want it to change so much as to get close to being a new language as the major version bump indicates.

And these aren't thoughts i had on my own, they're condensations of thoughts others had that i agree with.

However, without versioning it can't and in fact the existing proposed plans for unversioned default changes are extremely careful and conservative and in fact do very little at all. Not remotely enough to justify a major version bump. Maybe even to the point that it would be bad PR and in invitation of mockery if Perl bumped a major version with so few and small changes.

These also are thoughts from others that i found myself agreeing with.

Please give us a Perl dialect whose differences matter.

With regards,
Christian Walde
Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About