John Porter wrote:
> 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.
Which programmer are you referring to here? The people writing Perl, or the people
writing Perl scripts?
If the former, I strongly disagree that that is or should be an appropriate Perl
philosophy. The implementers of perl should, and have historically, made it easy
to write Perl scripts.
If the latter, I agree that perl shouldn't require adherance to any particular
discipline, but neither should it require installing foreign font sets to enable
script writing. That doesn't make it easy to write or read Perl scripts.
If you are referring to some other group of programmers, the comment is irrelevant.
> 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.
Agreed.
However, proposing syntax like qc, with a single character delemiter, for multiline
comments when the choice of delimiter characters for commenting out random code and
other comments is severely constrained, just might make it hard to adhere to such a
coding discipline. Hence we need more discussion about that over in
perl6-language-mlc...
--
Glenn
=====
There are two kinds of people, those
who finish what they start, and so
on... -- Robert Byrne
____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________
Download Now http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Request a CDROM 1-800-333-3633
___________________________________________________________
