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

Re: Revisiting trim

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
demerphq
Date:
May 27, 2021 08:57
Subject:
Re: Revisiting trim
Message ID:
CANgJU+V+XvnMXvPdktaX+Lk07PMktnC_TTd15QrXhWHycpQw4w@mail.gmail.com
On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 09:57, mah.kitteh via perl5-porters
<perl5-porters@perl.org> wrote:
> I think waiting on this discussion/decision is terrible mistake. All you need is a ...

Given the problems the world faces I would not say "terrible" but I
agree it is a mistake. I would suggest a different "all you need is a"
than you I think (although maybe what you mean by Experimental::*
would cover my view), but I think sorting out where things should go
is a far more important decision than "should we add trim(med) to the
core". For me if its put in the right place where it can't cause
language conflict and is part of building an orderly and viable future
then I have no issue with it being in core. The *where* is the problem
for me.

Anyway, as for the proposal, if a trim like function is going to be
added to the standard keyword set, I think doing it as trimmed() with
the semantics outlined in this thread is at least a touch more
palatable than trim() which will definitely cause trouble all over.

But I really really appeal to those in charge these days to address
this issue of where new functional (not control) keywords go and how
it can be done in a forwards and backwards compatible way (meaning use
feature is out). I feel really strongly that a proper decision on that
subject will make all the rest of the debates on other functions much
less controversial.  Eg, so we have trimmed(), when (and where) do
ltrimmed and rtrimmed get added? Do we just endlessly accrete new
keywords into the main part of the language?  It just seems to create
so much unnecessary acrimony. Figure out a clean way to resolve the
forwards/backwards compatibility issue (which is pretty easy with well
chosen namespaces) and IMO almost all of the acrimony will go away.
Why should anyone care if a new speciality function gets added to a
fenced off namespace?

cheers,
Yves


-- 
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"

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