Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2022
Re: PSC #049 2022-01-07
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Yuki Kimoto
Date:
January 15, 2022 23:02
Subject:
Re: PSC #049 2022-01-07
Message ID:
CAExogxP5kiH8LgD20sghtn42MohZtF6jeUv7yPP3BO-XL1GAug@mail.gmail.com
Is it possible to include an arity check discussion?
The arity check discussion seems to be ignored.
2022å¹´1æ14æ¥(é) 19:42 Neil Bowers <neilb@neilb.org>:
> Part of the problem here is that we donât know what the end-point is, and
> weâd like our next step to be a step in the right direction.
>
> If we make signatures non-experimental, and part of `use v5.36`, then
> weâll be encouraging "everyone" to start using signatures. This is a good
> step forward.
>
> I initially argued for #2, as I was worried that if are going to remove @_
> in the future, weâll be setting regular Perl programmers up for pain, if we
> donât help them avoid using @_ in signatured subs. Once we make something
> non-experimental, we have a responsibility to those programmers.
>
> Going with #1 possibly restricts what we can do in the future, but I still
> think we should do it, otherwise another year will have gone by without
> signatures. And for the bulk of Perl programmers, I suspect the big win is
> giving them what we already have.
>
> Neil
>
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next