Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2021
To start, I generally like the proposal made in this thread. On 2021-08-27 5:08 a.m., Paul "LeoNerd" Evans wrote: > We all generally agreed here - some other mechanism should exist, and > if it had existed at the time when such features as `fc` were added > then no doubt we would have used that, rather than the way they have > been. I'm thinking that once the new mechanism is implemented, a lot of existing routines such as `fc` should be converted to be implemented by it as if the feature had existed when they were introduced. > * What is the actual name for the fully-qualified namespace used by > these new functions? We used "builtin" during the discussion, but if > you have to `use` a module to get at them they can hardly be said to > be built-in For my part, with my Muldis Data Language, I had decided on the namespace "foundation" for all the built-in routines whose implementations are hidden from the user and in terms of which (along with non-routine language fundamentals) all other routines are defined. This isn't as short as "builtin" but the word itself doesn't imply its built in. > * Should it interact with `use VERSION`? Since we're already in a > world where `use VERSION` implies strict + warnings + a feature > bundle, it would be easy enough to suggest that it also pulls in a > function bundle of the same version. It would be nice if you could > > #!perl > use v5.40; > say "The reftype of arrays is ", reftype []; I'm thinking that "use vN;" by itself should implicitly make available the ability to say "builtin::foo()" AND the set of foo() available will directly depend on the version in "use vN;" meaning we are more free to change the built-in set at any time in any way without breaking compatibility because its behavior matches the "use vN;" that is explicitly opted in to. If one explicitly says "use builtin;" without a list then that is redundant with what the "use vN" already does in newer Perls. While having a version with "use builtin vN" makes sense for a CPAN module back-porting the feature, combining it with a "use vN;" in newer Perls should perhaps be considered an error. Also, "use vN;" should never import anything; instead one should have to explicitly "use builtin 'foo', 'bar', 'baz';" etc to import things, although you could have named bundles to make that more terse. -- Darren DuncanThread Previous | Thread Next