Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>
> > Operator Overloading
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > PLUS Called in + context
> > MINUS Called in - context
> > TIMES Called in * context
> > DIVIDED Called in / context
> > MODULUS Called in % context
>
> How about ye olde ADD, SUB, MUL, DIV, and MOD?
Yeah, these are good. They're the "wrong tense", but they are all the
same length, which is a plus.
> I continue to think that stealing names from the programmer is a bad
> thing. That's what RFC59 is all about. If we're going to use allcaps
> subroutines to mean something special to perl I think we should make
> it an error for the programmer to use them.
Actually, I think this is a pretty good idea. At least a warning similar
to what Perl 4 had for barewords:
ALLCAPS sub name may conflict with future reserved word at line 3.
Although it'll probably make the Perl 5 purists cringe. :-)
I never define my own methods in ALLCAPS just so they're not confused
with perl builtins. In fact, I generally don't define anything in
ALLCAPS for this reason. I usually use a leading _ for main variables or
private methods.
Enforcing "style" on users (prohibiting ALLCAPS) is probably gonna be a
tough sell. But I think a warning like the above would be almost a
necessity, especially since it looks like we're going to have 50+
ALLCAPS methods predefined in Perl 6 at least.
-Nate
