Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2022
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021, at 13:39, breno wrote: > I am super excited to bring you this pre-RFC feature request, and humbly ask you to review and let me know whether it has what it takes to go further up the RFC road. This morning in the PSC's weekly call, we were discussing this proposal and its status. I said I'd write something back to the list. Having re-read the posts, I think there was a lot of work in the weeds, and the pre-RFC question sounds like "yes of course people would like something like this," and then we get to the actual RFC question. But Breno's pre-RFC was basically an RFC and could be filed as such, then to be worked on until ready for someone to have a crack at implementing. My comments on the PSC call this morning were mostly that I felt the most valuable simplification would be to provide an explanation of ?-> in terms of what it's equivalent to. For example: EXPR1 ?-> EXPR2 # is equivalent to defined EXPR1 ? EXPR1->EXPR2 : undef # with the caveat that EXPR1 is only evaluated once I think the objection (made by a few, including me) that we need to use "defined" (as I do in the snippet above) rather than "ref" as the test should be taken into account in any re-submission of the RFC. But is there anything left to do but… 1. submit the RFC in an updated form 2. discuss whether it's ready to implement in that form 3. eventually say it's ready for implementing ? -- rjbsThread Previous | Thread Next