Glenn Linderman wrote: > > Agreed, but neither should perl implement features which make it hard for the > programmer to stick to that advice. That sounds reasonable, on first take, but actually I think that goes against the grain of perl's philosophy, which is to let the programmer do what she wants. Anyway, allowing the use of unicode characters in syntactic constructions (such as in q{} ) does not make it hard to adhere to a coding discipline which forbids them. -- John Porter
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Ted Ashton
- Re: RFC: multiline comments John Porter
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Michael Mathews
- Re: RFC: multiline comments John Porter
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Ted Ashton
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC: multiline comments John Porter
- A Unicode fallacy [Was: Re: RFC:... Glenn Linderman
- Re: A Unicode fallacy [Was: Re: ... John Porter
- Re: A Unicode fallacy [Was: Re: ... Glenn Linderman
- Re: A Unicode fallacy [Was: Re: ... John Porter
- Re: A Unicode fallacy [Was: Re: ... Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Michael Mathews
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Graham Barr
- Re: RFC: multiline comments Michael Mathews