>But for style, I don't see why >the interpreter can't also check for various non-obscure syntaxes / styles. (You mean "compiler", not interpreter.) You have to be quite careful there: Perl is so humungous that what's obscure to one person is well-known to the next. For example, $#foo is verging on the obscure for many these days, who would surely pause at reading $#foo /= 2; I don't mean to suggest that $#foo should be "preserved"; just poiting out that in many places, "obscure" is a judgment call, and suggest that we should avoid being too judgmental. --tom, who is about ready to give up on this lame American habit of writing "judgment" and "acknowledgment" with their e's!
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and s/// with mat... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and s/// wit... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and s///... Richard Proctor
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Michael Maraist
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Michael Maraist
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Nathan Torkington
- Creating Perl 6, not Perl++ (was Re: RFC 1... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and ... Mark-Jason Dominus
- Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and s///... Nathan Wiger