Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2022
* Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> [2022-06-12 21:39:27 -0400]:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2022, at 17:36, Graham Knop wrote:
> > I like the general idea. I don't really like the spelling though, as ${ } already has meaning in the language and in interpolated strings. I'd say that the @{} form is not needed. Eliminating it could allow a better spelling for the ${ } form.
> >
> > Prior art: https://metacpan.org/pod/Quote::Code
>
> Thanks. If we have only one form, I'd suggest we use `#{ ... }` from Ruby.
>
> Quote::Code raises a good point: this would be useful in heredocs. I'll think about it.
I agree; but in the example from Q::C:
my $heredoc = qc_to <<'EOT';
.trigger:hover .message:after {
content: "The #{get_adjective()} brown fox #{get_verb()} over the lazy dog.";
}
EOT
print $heredoc;
It'd be more consistent for it to be, (hint: s/#/&/):
my $heredoc = qc_to <<'EOT';
.trigger:hover .message:after {
content: "The &{get_adjective()} brown fox &{get_verb()} over the lazy dog.";
}
EOT
print $heredoc;
Q::C doesn't mention the rationale for '#" over '&' in this case, nor can I
think of a reason to not use it here for the subroutine call. Besides, it could
get a little confusing since bare '#' indicates a comment.
Cheers,
Brett
>
> --
> rjbs
--
--
oodler@cpan.org
oodler577@sdf-eu.org
SDF-EU Public Access UNIX System - http://sdfeu.org
irc.perl.org #openmp #pdl #native
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next