same or greater ease than pod for build and configuration.
/pod
[...]
/pod
That is an excellent description of why THIS IS COMPLETE
MADNESS.
Maybe I'm reading too much into the comment, but I thought the big deal was
that the example given was not only verbose, but wouldn't
s/x/5/; # this is still going to replace
# all the eckses in $_ with fives.
Why? This is an arbitrary decision if you've declared variables to
be
barewords.
I think it's a sane decision -- IMHO barewords shouldn't be allowed to
And how about:
int length = 256 ;
and, if that's legal, what does:
print "I wonder what this is : " . length ;
do?
I imagine the first order of business for the C JIT team would be
some conversion operators. Numeric types stringify into decimal
Damian Conway:
My forthcoming proposal will be that invocants still be passed as $_[0]
by default, but that there be a pragma allowing $_[0] to be automagically
shifted somewhere else during dispatch. For example:
sub method { print "I was called through: $_[0]";
(Or, was it already intended that the implementation of 'use
invocant' might be some sort of compile-time macro?)
No. I think a macro facility for Perl should be more general than just
whacking some code in at the start of every subroutine.
Yes. I didn't phrase my comments well.
Karl Glazebrook wrote:
But what is $x[3] ?
It could be a scalar.
BUT it could be a reference to a list.
It could be a reference to a 2D PDL image.
... but references are scalar. So, $x[3] *is* a scalar.
That scalar could be a reference to a list. It could be a reference to a 2D
PDL
