It's quite a disappointment in some ways, but we've lived with it in
Perl 5, and I'm sure we can live with it in Perl 6.
And I still think Perl 6 will have fewer cases in which it's completely
impossible for not-Perl to parse it. Unfortunately, fewer still implies
some, and some is still a pro
Adam Kennedy wrote:
Frankly, as the only person who has managed to get together a "guessing
lexer" that is sufficiently accurate to be something other than useless,
Hm. I must confess that I don't consider Text::Balanced's
C subroutine to be entirely useless. And presumably neither
do the th
> "Luke" == Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Luke> But you don't really need to parse to syntax highlight, either. You
Luke> just need to tokenize.
Unfortunately, to tokenize, you also have to know the state of the parse.
As long as / is both "divide" and "begin regex", you're toasted
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Luke" == Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Luke> But you don't really need to parse to syntax highlight, either. You
Luke> just need to tokenize.
Unfortunately, to tokenize, you also have to know the state of the parse.
As long as / is both "divide" and "begin reg
> "Matthew" == Matthew Walton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Matthew> So you're saying that in Perl 6 it will be entirely impossible to
Matthew> determine if / appears as the division operator or as the beginning of
Matthew> a regex from a purely syntactic examination of the source code?
Yes.
M
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Matthew" == Matthew Walton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Matthew> So you're saying that in Perl 6 it will be entirely impossible to
Matthew> determine if / appears as the division operator or as the beginning of
Matthew> a regex from a purely syntactic examination of the s
> "Matthew" == Matthew Walton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Matthew> Perl 6 has formal parameters for subs, methods etc. I don't see any
Matthew> mention of Perl 5-style prototypes in S6, and I honestly can't see how
Matthew> they could possibly fit with formal parameters. Hopefully Larry or
Mat
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Matthew" == Matthew Walton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Matthew> Perl 6 has formal parameters for subs, methods etc. I don't see any
Matthew> mention of Perl 5-style prototypes in S6, and I honestly can't see how
Matthew> they could possibly fit with formal parameters. Ho
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
All the handwaving in the world won't fix this. As long as we have
dual-natured characters like /, and user-defined prototypes, Perl
cannot be lexed without also parsing, and therefore without also
running BEGIN blocks.
And user-defined prototypes that change when the arg
James Mastros skribis 2004-11-26 14:36 (+0100):
> And user-defined prototypes that change when the argument list of a
> function ends, that is. If we forced the argument list for all
> functions to have parens (including empty parens for argument less
> functions), then we'd be OK, I'm fairly c
10 matches
Mail list logo
