----- Original Message ----- From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Saturday, December 18, 2004 4:16 pm Subject: Re: Auto My?
> Rod Adams writes: > There are pros and cons, and it basically ends up being a design > choice. > > Well, at least when strictures are on. When they are off, the > coder is > > obviously playing fast and loose, and should get the easy > 'everything > > global' behavior. > > When strictures are on, the compiler ought to die if you're tyring to > use a variable without declaration. This is another reason why Perl > doesn't like autodeclaration. As bad of an idea that I think this is, I wonder if Perl6's reflection capabilities will be powerful enough to where a module/pragma could be written that would be able to do this? For instance, one idea was: lexically change the current grammar to a subclass of the grammar. In this subclass, there is a hook on the "variable" deparsing rule that will implictly declare a variable into its outer scope if it has not yet been declared in the current scope. Totally whacky, sure; but doable? That brings up another idea that I had just now: will it be possible to load 2 different grammars at once if they don't conflict with each other? For instance, say we have loaded a grammer, Grammar::WhackyVars, that subclasses from the main Perl6 grammar but modifies the "variable" rule somehow. However, then say I want to use a grammar that also subclasses from the main Perl6 grammar that lets you use "happyfunactiontime" instead of the word "class". Since the modified rules don't conflict with each other, can I just "use Grammar::HappyFunActionTime" and everything will work? Or will Grammar::HappyFunActionTime overload the changes done by the Grammar::WhackyVars? - Joe
