Aaron Sherman skribis 2004-04-15 14:29 (-0400): > On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 16:56, Juerd wrote: > > How many of those backticks > Note, those weren't backticks, those were programs. There were 123 > PROGRAMS that used backticks or equivalent syntax.
I said backticks, and I meant backticks. I'm not sure why there is confusion over this. Perhaps this can disambiguate: how many of those backticks in those 123 programs. > > And how often are simple hash subscripts used? > Very often. Many times as often as qx and friends? > Security is not an issue for this code. It should be. > code review? You made and assertion: backticks aren't used much. That > assertion is faulty. I didn't formulate my statement carefully enough. I should have said: "as much as hash subscription". > Executing external code is commonplace, and probably done more often > than method invocation in the wild! I want to doubt that. Or better: help change that. > > It's just one keyword and a set of quotes more: $( readpipe "pwd" ) > And thus, it is not like the bash/zsh style syntax in the least. Why should Perl have to limit itself to shell-like syntax? It doesn't do that with if-constructs, foreach-loops, procedures, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. > Unless there is substantially new information in this thread, I think > you have presented your case for yet another new subscripting syntax. I think I have presented two cases. The removal of `` and the introduction of %hash`key. Either can be implemented without breaking the other, though I obviously think both letting `` go and introducing the infix ` is better. Juerd
