Hi, Michele Dondi wrote: >> Good, I'd forgotten about that. Which means that it's even harder >> for someone to compile a module in a "strange" dialect, since they'd >> essentially have to write their own version of "use" that forces >> recompilation ("reuse", if you will). And the harder we make it to >> write "reuse", the better. > > IIUC this will introduce a certain degree of asymmetry though, in that > in some sense p6 will be extremely generous in giving users the > ability to use whatever dialect/syntax modification they like in their > programs but just at the same time it will try to make it hard for > them to do so when refactoring code into suitable modules. Ain't it > so?
no, if I understood Larry correctly, you can of course write a nice grammar-modifying module, but other modules you use() still use Perl 6's standard grammar. E.g.: use Grammar::Ruby; # Ruby syntax from here on: proc { |a| puts a + 1 }.call 3 # 4 use SomeOtherModule # SomeOtherModule.pm will be parsed using the standard grammar, # *not* Grammar::Ruby. If you wanted the compiler to parse SomeOtherModule.pm using Ruby's grammar, you'd have to write: use Grammar::Ruby; reuse SomeOtherModule --Ingo -- Linux, the choice of a GNU | Row, row, row your bits, gently down the generation on a dual AMD | stream... Athlon! |