Hi Richard,
Richard Foley wrote:
> > New Plan
> > ========
> > So I would like to make a patch now, that will have 'n' short cut
> > for ANY code block, not only subroutines. And that should be done
> > without a regexp.
> >
> Hmmm, yes but there's always exceptions... consider arriving at the
> following pseudocode under the debugger:
>
> <DB 1>
> {
> code1;
> code2;
> code3;
> }
> code4;
>
> Do you want to step over all the three code lines above with 'n'?
No, I don't want that. I probably phrased my intention unprecisely.
Whenever a real subroutine is involved, it should be stepped over.
Sometimes this is an argument to the sort function...
> Probably not if it's just a way of controlling lexical variables, for
> example, you would be expecting to step to the next statement (code1)
> rather than leap over to code4. I'm not sure what the solution is,
> but as you can see from the various comments, it's never quite as
> simple as it might seem at first. Possibly because it's Perl,
> there's just SMWTDI (so many ways to do it), that these kind of edge
> cases can become quite problematic.
Agreed.
Heiko
