develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from May 2022

Re: 5.36.0: bareword filehandles, indirect

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans
Date:
May 14, 2022 23:41
Subject:
Re: 5.36.0: bareword filehandles, indirect
Message ID:
20220515004110.1f06debc@shy.leonerd.org.uk
On Sat, 14 May 2022 22:54:14 +0200
"Christian Walde" <walde.christian@gmail.com> wrote:

> That said, after inspecting them myself:
> 
> no indirect; causes indirect-parsed calls to throw a warning which
> can be elevated to an error. This is useful in preventing code from
> doing the wrong thing.
> 
> no feature 'indirect'; appears to cause the parser not even consider
> the indirect parse path in the first place, meaning the code does
> what it was intended to do in the first place.
> 
> The latter is vastly more preferrable to me, personally. I am not
> being made to go back and change what i wrote.

While that's a useful observation, the question is less about the idea
and more abou the actual implementation. We know the idea of `no
feature indirect` is good - we're wondering if there are any
implementation bugs.

no feature "bareword_filehandles" is also a good idea, but an 11th-hour
bug has been found in it meaning we had to back that one out again.
It's a shame. 

In recent memory, 5.34 released the try/catch syntax that very soon
after release, someone found a bug in it.

In both of these cases, they are failures because the proposed idea was
insufficiently-well tested in a wide variety of situations before being
declared releaseable. We're worried if the same is going to happen with
indirect.

-- 
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans

leonerd@leonerd.org.uk      |  https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
http://www.leonerd.org.uk/  |  https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/

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