Re: a name for the currently executing sub

[David L. Nicol]

Dan Sugalski wrote:

> >IMO the name of the currently executing sub should be accessed via an
> >extention to C<caller()>.
> >
> >         caller{subname}
> 
> Oh? What prints, then?
> 
>    $foo = sub {print caller{subname}};
>    $foo->();

something like CODE(0x80cfd7c) since we don't have a better name for it.



--- warning --- bad idea follows ---


Are we willing to let user-code use codereftagstrings abckwards yet?

perl -le '$a = \(1..4); $tagstring="$a"; print @{$tagstring}'

We would eliminate all strings matching /^[A-Z]\(0x[0-9a-f]+\)\z/ from
use as variable names. I don't think that would break all that much but
the 5->6 converter could identify ref->stringify and mung it slightly,
maybe add a \0 at the end or something.

We would gain C style casting capability, with all the evil that brings
with it, including the ability to bittwiddle perl structures from
within perl, which is a feature migrating C programmers miss.

But we would need to check every instance of X{$Y}  where  X is
a syntactic variable-type-identifier against the it's-a-refstring
regex.  Maybe a pragma to turn these checks on?

        use unsafe_string_dereferences


would anyone use it?

-- 
                      David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
                      www.tmcm.com, dammit