On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 08:12:22AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
I think that Csubst is too syntactically close yet semantically far
from Csubstr that the evil demons of confusion will rear their ugly
heads.
I agree too, any suggestions are welcome. The fact
Simple solution.
If you want to require formats such as m/.../ (which I actually think is a
good idea), then make it part of -w, -W, -ww, or -WW, which would be a perl6
enhancement of strictness.
That's like having "use strict" enable mandatory perlstyle compliance
checks, and rejecting the
Michael Maraist writes:
Compatibility is going to have to be maintained somehow. And we can either
have some sort of perl6 designator (such as the pragma) to designate
incompatible (and otherwise ambiguous) code, or we're going to have to
continue tacking on syntactic sugar to legacy code.
Nathan Torkington wrote:
Hmm. This is exactly the same situation as with chomp() and somehow
chomp() can tell the difference between:
$_ = "hi\n";
chomp;
and
@strings = ();
chomp @strings;
Good point. I was looking at it from the general "What's wrong with how
@arrays are
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Replace =~, !~, m//, and s/// with match() and subst()
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 27 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 164
