>>>>> "KS" == Kripa Sundar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KS> Uri isn't saying that it doesn't exist. Uri is saying that it doesn't KS> make sense to have such a stricture because it won't work with dynamic KS> definitions and AUTOLOAD. My response is the same as before. KS> The stricture would definitely be incompatible with some legal Perl KS> code, but that is what strictures are all about. i can see all sorts of issues arising with existing code and such a new stricture. it would have to be lexically scoped to be safe at all. also the only people who could build such a pragma are on p5 so i suggest you bring your idea to them. i am not against it if people want it but i find it not to be something i care to use. then again, i dislike syntax highlighters and IDE's that claim to do everything for you but think. i like to think when i code. :) KS> Anyway, I'll stop repeating myself right now to avoid KS> excommunication. :-) i don't think ronald will unsubscribe you for this. you would have to be truly offensive like pushing python to little kiddies in the playground. "hey, wanna play with my indented code blocks??" uri -- Uri Guttman ------ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------- http://www.stemsystems.com --Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding- Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org _______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
