On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> "Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
> >
> > ... is the cause for this. All the discussion is taking place in the
> > master list before the sublists are spawned. You can only express the
> > opinion that foo is not bar and never should be so many times.
>
> I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some permanent
> sublists, which we're informally leaning towards already. Something
> like:
>
> -io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
> -subs = ALL sub/method/func issues, like lvalue subs
> -strict = ALL lexical/global variable scoping issues
> -objects = ALL OO and module issues
> -flow = ALL flow/threading issues
> -errors = ALL error handling issues
> -datetime = ALL date/time/etc issue
I'd like to see this as well. However, I'd like to see some
fairly clearly definitions of what each list is and is not intended to
cover--I'm not suggesting that we be Draconian about it, but some of these
things blur. For example, a closure could be see as a subroutine, so it
should go to -subs, but it can also be used as an object, so it should go
to -OO. Subroutine calls are a flow issue, so do I post something about
subs to -subs or to -flow? You get the idea.
Dave
