On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 07:17:14PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Juerd skribis 2005-04-20 19:09 (+0200):
: > I'm not sure the XX thing will happen, but if it does, it'd be most
: > useful if it wouldn't treat a sub call differently.
:
: I forgot rationale.
:
: It shouldn't treat a sub call differently, so that a called sub can in a
: useful manner return a closure, which is then executed several times.
: The same annoying special syntax can be found in perl 5's goto, that
: can't go to a returned subref using "goto sub_that_returns_a_subref();".
Doesn't this work in Perl 5?
goto &{sub_that_returns_a_subref()};
If not, I'd say it's a bug.
: Which brings me to the following questions:
:
: Does goto LABEL still exist in Perl 6?
:
: Must LABEL be quoted/a normal string?
Hmm, well we do still have bare labels for loop control, so I'd
probably still put goto LABEL into the same category. Overloading
goto in Perl 5 for stack frame replacement was probably a mistake.
These days that should probably be handled with &sub.tailcall(@_) or
some such anyway so that we can confuse it with ordinary tailcall
optimizations. In fact, that might just be what ordinary tailcall
optimization compiles down to.
Larry
