Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2022
* Dan Book <grinnz@gmail.com> [2022-06-07 00:16:30 -0400]: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 12:11 AM Oodler 577 via perl5-porters < > perl5-porters@perl.org> wrote: > > > * Yuki Kimoto <kimoto.yuki@gmail.com> [2022-06-07 09:16:22 +0900]: > > > > > 2022-6-7 7:07 Neil Bowers <neilb@neilb.org> wrote: > > > > > > > This is a retrospective Pre-RFC for a proposal from Curtis, for which > > he > > > > submitted a draft RFC[1]. We nearly missed it when reviewing proposals > > > > in-flight in our PSC meeting last week, and decided to trigger a > > discussion > > > > here, to reinforce the process. > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/Perl/RFCs/pull/16 > > > > > > > > > > > I want to hear the haarg' proposal a little more. > > > > > > >There is another model that could be used. could always ignore the > > return > > > value from the file if the feature was enabled. This is simpler than the > > > previous option, but accomplishes essentially the same thing. It still > > > needs special handling in , but doesn't need to care about an implicit vs > > > explicit return. In practice, the return value from a ed file is not > > usable > > > for anything. The only impact it will have on perl's behavior is throwing > > > an error for a false value. This is better done by throwing a real error. > > > If there is no real purpose for returning an explicit value, why > > complicate > > > the model by trying to handle specially? > > > > > > Does this mean changing the behavior of "use", "require", "do" in the > > > "yield_true" > > > feature? > > > > I can't find a good read on what the "1;" is for; I just know it needs > > to be there and can be anything "truthy". I've even seen cheeky module > > authors return "666;", which to be fair is true. However, upon reading > > what I could find in perldocs and about, it seems that if it is a "1;" > > or something else; C<use>, C<require>, and C<do> all need something to > > say definitively that "here is the end of package Foo's scope". Would > > that be a "feature" or just something internal that could mark the "end" > > of a package scope when it hit something like the end of the file? > > > It does not affect scope or the package in any way. It is the return value > of the required file. Oh, gotcha. This seems like a non-issue, akin to advocating we not use periods in the last sentence of every paragraph for something kind of related to children finding it difficult to understand why you'd want that or the rationale used to argue in favor of eliminating the Oxford Comma. It just makes things more ambiguous, dazed and confused Cheers, Brett > > -Dan -- -- oodler@cpan.org oodler577@sdf-eu.org SDF-EU Public Access UNIX System - http://sdfeu.org irc.perl.org #openmp #pdl #nativeThread Previous | Thread Next