> >> * The user has to work out how to find the
> >> "Regexp Quote-Like Operators" section in perlop, and
> >>
> >> 1. What do you think about this?
> >
> > I think it's not much work to look in perlop.
> >
> >> 2. If you agree that "perldoc -f qw" should return some
> >> actual content about the qw function,
> >
> > I think it's fine. It's not a function, it's an operator.
>
> Then this should go out of the "scope" of perldoc -f.
>
> Either it should remain in, so it would be better to give immediate help
> without hunting, or it should go out because it's an operator and not a
> function. The hybrid way seems confusing to me.
I suppose I'm happy that qw() can be described as a function and as an
operator, depending on the context of the documentation.
(After all, it's listed in perlfunc under the heading "Functions for list
data", and I don't see that thinking about it in this way hinders
comprehension).
I'm really not that interested in experienced developers who *know* what qw()
does, rather I'm much more concerned about the person who is new to Perl
who sees usage like,
use CGI qw/:standard :html3 gradient/;
in some standard doco, and then quite reasonably thnks of qw as a function,
but then can't get at anything useful via perldoc -f qw
I think this kind of thing is more of a mental stumbling block for the newer
Perl developer than experienced developers might realize.
I'm quite happy to drop the matter here if people don't share my concern, but
I would like to see perldoc -f qw (and others) generate something more
useful.
Regards,
Simon Taylor
--
Unisolve Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Australia
+61 3 9568 2005
