This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Downgrade or remove "In string @ must be \@" error
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 105
Stat
Thus it was written in the epistle of Perl6 RFC Librarian,
>
> This is something that was put in to catch Perl 4 to Perl 5 migration.
> Perl 6 shouldn't need it, and should just assume that "@wiger" is an
> array, even if it's unitialized. This is what it does for all the other
> data types.
Bet
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 04:09:51PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
> Better yet, DWIM. If I write
>
> print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
>
> and no array @southern exists, I probably mean I want it to print
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
Ted Ashton wrote:
>
> Better yet, DWIM. If I write
> print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
> and no array @southern exists, I probably mean I want it to print
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
> it stands.
Um, no. Something about the relaxati
> Better yet, DWIM. If I write
>
> print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
>
> and no array @southern exists, I probably mean I want it to print
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
> it stands.
I initially was thinking this too, but there's
> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jonathan> Isn't that the way perl4 did it? I don't know what agony lwall and
Jonathan> friends went through that made them change this behaviour though. It
Jonathan> would be good for someone who does to speak up about it.
It
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 04:09:51PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
> Better yet, DWIM. If I write
>
> print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
>
> and no array @southern exists, I probably mean I want it to print
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
At 02:44 PM 8/15/00 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > Better yet, DWIM. If I write
> >
> > print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
> >
> > and no array @southern exists, I probably mean I want it to print
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
Peter Scott wrote:
> I have often wished that digraphs were not bundled with variables in this
> respect, i.e., I wanted to put a string containing \n inside single quotes
> just 'cuz it didn't contain variables to be interpolated. Whether there's
> a way of improving this behavior or not I don'
> "PS" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I want this to *always* print out the _value_ of @stuff, even if it's
>> unititalized.
PS> Arrays aren't uninitialized. They contain zero or more scalars, some of
PS> which may be uninitialized.
I don't know if it is still true. But at
Peter Scott wrote:
> I have often wished that digraphs were not bundled with variables in this
> respect, i.e., I wanted to put a string containing \n inside single quotes
> just 'cuz it didn't contain variables to be interpolated. Whether there's
> a way of improving this behavior or not I don't
"Randal L. Schwartz" wrote:
>
> What would be NICE is to treat @stonehenge here as *always* a variable
> So, I'd support a modification to the RFC that does what Larry intended
> here:
>
> array interpolation should work exactly like scalar interpolation
That was actually the intent of
This has already been done for Perl 5.6.1. Here is what perldelta.pod
has to say.
=head2 Arrays now Always Interpolate Into Double-Quoted Strings
In double-quoted strings, arrays now interpolate, no matter what. The
behavior in perl 5 was that arrays would interpolate into strings if
the ar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Wiger) wrote on 15.08.00 in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
> > it stands.
>
> I initially was thinking this too, but there's a major problem:
>
>print "Your stuff is: @stuff\n";
>
> I want this to *alw
Glenn Linderman wrote:
>
> Peter Scott wrote:
>
> > I have often wished that digraphs were not bundled with variables in this
> > respect, i.e., I wanted to put a string containing \n inside single quotes
> > just 'cuz it didn't contain variables to be interpolated. Whether there's
> > a way of
15 matches
Mail list logo
