On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Kenneth Graves wrote:
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:48:24 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> what do you guys think about attributes? i think they are
> reasonably good for variables but i get hazy when they are applied
> to values. i'm not sure why. maybe cause i've never seen it. anyone
> ever seen anything like it? i supose my biggest turn off was the "0
> is true" example. they should really retire that as an example :)
>
> Here's a worse example:
> $x is false = 0 is true;
well what is the result of this really? it's not like all attributes have
an opposite. these attributes are not stored in a field either as i would
have guest. you did not say $x is boolean = false. you said $x is
false. for user defined attributes a variable could have many, but perl
wouldn't know they were contradictory. in your above example i'm guessing
that $x would have both the false attribute and true attribute set unless
they either put them in a field to group them or had a special case to say
true is not false.
> (Alter the first bit to whatever "variable attribute" syntax ends up being.
> The point is to get variable attributes and value attributes arguing with
> each other.)
>
> I see a great danger that either type of attribute will complicate the
> language excessively. I remember being thrown for a loop when I saw
> something similar in Common Lisp. (Long time ago. What were they called?
> property lists?) Perl already has a "kitchen sink" reputation, and
> I'd rather we not frighten the non-natives any more than necessary.
>
> --kag
>
