On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 at 07:02, Dan Book <grinnz@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 5:23 PM Paul "LeoNerd" Evans < > leonerd@leonerd.org.uk> wrote: > >> Before I get onto my actual point, let me paint a picture that is a >> convenient lie, told through rose-tinted spectacles. It is not >> completely true, but imagine in some future version of perl where the >> `use builtin` feature becomes stable: >> > > Apologies for the curt response to this detailed explanation, but I > definitely support trying to make this implementation more intuitive as > long as it can be done without breaking compatibility of common paradigms > (such as interaction with importers like Moose, or using strict and > warnings explicitly after use VERSION even though it may enable them). The > one thing that would be worse than the current situation is if code > silently had less strictures/warnings enabled than before, or enabled > additional strictures than intended in production. > The concept seems reasonable, just not too clear on exactly what's being suggested - would this affect these two cases, for example? { # Only using some of the features, e.g. variables should be declared, but keep barewords and symbolic references enabled use strict 'vars'; our $x = example; # should be fine $y = 'compile-time error'; # should fail } and use strict; { # limited-scope disabling of a feature no strict 'refs'; our $typo; my $name = 'whatever'; *$name = sub { # this part is fine ++$tpyo # would want a compile-time error here }; }Thread Previous | Thread Next