At 09:16 AM 4/26/2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:33:33AM -0400, Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> > | Alternately, we can overload . to do a deref on (blessed?) references,
> > | and
> > | concat otherwise.
> >
> > I think this would lead to hard to find bugs when someone mispelled
> > something.
>
>I think it would also throw Dan into convusive fits.
Nah. Not convulsive ones, at least. (I'll work from the example Jon Orwant
set instead... :)
>Additionally, it
>would make finding method calls lexically near impossible. I'd like
>to keep Perl 6 refactorable as much as possible.
While it doesn't argue for or against the current period issue, figuring
out what code really does is more the provence of the parser rather than
analysis code. ('Specially since a single use could potentially throw
things subtly out of whack)
Which means we really ought to have hooks into the parser, or a tool to
analyze the unoptimized bytecode from the parser, to do this sort of thing.
B::Deparse for perl 6, say.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
