Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2021
On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 1:09 AM Yuki Kimoto <kimoto.yuki@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2021-8-30 13:30 Dan Book <grinnz@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 11:46 PM Yuki Kimoto <kimoto.yuki@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> 2021-8-27 21:08 Paul "LeoNerd" Evans <leonerd@leonerd.org.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> #!perl >>>> use v5.40; >>>> say "The reftype of arrays is ", reftype []; >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> There is one point I would like PSC to add to the discussion. >>> >>> Are all builtin functions imported to the "main" namespace? >>> >>> Or, are just only the functions we consider very important imported >>> to the "main" namespace? >>> >>> I would like to add this to the discussion because the "main" namespace >>> is also the user's space, so smaller conflicts are better. >>> >> >> It won't go into any namespace if it is implemented as a lexical keyword >> like you get from feature.pm. >> >> -Dan >> > > >> And furthermore, builtins are not in main either, they are in CORE. > > Dan, thank you for the information. > > From now on, I will say CORE. > > I understand that is lexical. > > My point is that already imported user functions need fully qualified > names. > > For example, Think about that the generic name ”get" is added to CORE > namespace. > > User "get" function needs a fully qualified name. > > # Old code > use Foo 'get'; > > get '/aaa'; > > # New code > use v5.40; > > use Foo (); > > Foo::get '/aaa'; > > So I feel it would be better to have fewer collisions. > Imported symbols override builtins already, this is how modules like autodie and Time::HiRes work. But yes, this chance of collision is unavoidable and we have to take more care with more common names. -DanThread Previous | Thread Next