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

Re: Pre-RFC: syntax for quote-words-arrayref

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Elvin Aslanov
Date:
May 31, 2022 08:56
Subject:
Re: Pre-RFC: syntax for quote-words-arrayref
Message ID:
CAJ4KP=2BhQ38_DEozbc1VewEnMM640eiu17+AwBr4MU814MUTQ@mail.gmail.com
wow qz: is cool (comments, please), but why not to have both, qa as a
shortcut for qz:d[

---

general solution (ie. chainsaw) is always better, and new features like
comments makes it to be more than a simple shortcut
I had a lot of cases to quote my array and hashref values manually to have
a separate comment on each line

thanks for this

On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:41 AM Neil Bowers <neilb@neilb.org> wrote:

> In early March last year, I proposed[1] new syntax for "quote words
> arrayref",
> so that the following:
>
>     $a = [qw/ a b c /];
>
> could be replaced with:
>
>     $a = qa[ a b c ];
>
> (or maybe qwa[] or qaw[]). There are modules for this on CPAN - see my
> original post for references[1].
>
> Roughly 36% of CPAN distributions use that idiom at least once.
> This seemed to be well received. Until ...
>
> Rik said why not go all-in and spec out a new swiss army chainsaw quoter,
> which can take options, so, using qz as an example:
>
>     $a = qz:d[ a b c ];     # 'd' says delimiter determines type, arrayref
>     $h = qz:d{ ...   };     # hashref
>     @a = qz:d( a b c );     # list, i.e. like qw( ... )
>
> But also:
>
>     $a = qz:id[ a $b c ];   # i: interpolative
>     $a = qz:dx[
>             a   # with a comment
>             b
>             c   # another comment
>          ];
> At least two people liked the comments and interpolation.
>
> I find myself wishing we had qa[] on a regular basis. I've never wished
> for an equivalent for hashrefs, or for comments, or interpolation.
> The => already gives us barewords on the left;
> do people really want it for the values as well?
> Enough people?
>
> The motivation for qa[] is that it's easier to read, and less to type.
> The chainsaw undoes that saving, plus now we have two ways to quote
> basic word lists.
>
> I couldn't see myself using it, and it's more confusing looking for the
> casual reader/programmer than the syntax I was originally trying to
> improve.
> I want to make life easier for the 38% of CPAN authors, not the some
> small number of very experienced Perl programmers.
>
> So really, I just want qa[], but if I can't get that past the pesky PSC,
> then we could consider having the options of Rik's idea always turned on,
> and we name it qs, or the smart quote operator[2]?
>
>     $a = qs[ a b c ];
>     @a = qs( a b c );
>     %h = qs( a 1 b 2 c 3 );
>     $h = qs{ a 1 b 2 c 3 };
>
> You wouldn't be allowed to use anything other than [], (), and {} as quote
> chars.
>
> We could make => a no-op, so you can at least make it look like a hash:
>
>     $h = qs{ a => 1 b => 2 c => 3 };
>
> That might cause more confusion than benefit though, so probably not.
>
> It would interpolate other scalars, arrays, and hashes,
> and would allow inline comments
>
>     $w = qs[
>                zork         # blah blah
>                xyzzy        # plugh plugh
>                $favourite
>                @defaults
>            ];
>
> But, you say, what if people want the literal '@defaults' in there?
> I think things that are different should look different,
> and if you want that literally, then you should see '@defaults'.
>
> Really, I just want qa[]. I see evidence for the value of that.
> I don't see evidence for qs, but that doesn't mean that people wouldn't
> use it.
>
> Neil
>
> [1]
> https://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2021/03/msg259214.html
> [2] We should never name anything "smart <thing>" again, of course.
>
>
>

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