Re: End-of-scope actions: Toward a hybrid approach.

[John Porter]

Glenn Linderman wrote:
> you'll note that RFC 119 does, in fact, place catch statements inside
> the scope of the block to which they apply, 

Yup!  I wish I could take credit for this, historically, but an
examination of the archives shows that Glenn holds priority.


> So in RFC 119, we have in-scope catch statements, dangling except
> clauses, and dangling always clauses.  

I'll go on the record as saying that I am totally opposed to
dangling "clauses" of any kind.
In fact, I'd be happy if legacy constructs like 'continue'
were made inscope (?) instead of dangling.


-- 
John Porter

You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.