On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 01:20:43PM -0300, Branden wrote: > `my' DWIMs. `my' will do what *you* mean at the cost of every single existing perl programmer that currently uses it to relearn what it means. Not a good trade off IMHO. I'd rather `my' does what *I* mean which is what it does now. > I know this is bad for who already writes Perl code. But it would be very > good for who learns Perl and doesn't understand exactly when he should and > when he should not put parenthesis around `my's list of variables. If they are learning perl, then when and where to use parentheses is part of the learning curve. This is a Good Thing. MHO, -Scott -- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: Closures and default lex... John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lex... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lex... Nicholas Clark
- Re: Closures and default lexical... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lex... Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Closures and default lex... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lex... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lex... Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Closures and default lex... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lex... Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Closures and default lex... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Closures and default lex... John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lex... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lex... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope fo... Randal L. Schwartz
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scop... Peter Scott
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scop... abigail
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope fo... abigail
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for su... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope fo... John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs David Grove