> The only thing I remark is that I believe all of Perl should be the
> most exposed possible, so that unseen levels of introspection
> can be achieved. In that philosophy I wrote my idea about
> exposing the engine's guts.
I'm well-known as a non-delving-into-the-guts type of guy. I don't have
a problem with your proposal, since (as Rick points out) it can easily
be viewed as a superset of mine, and made no harder to implement (assuming
we eventually see method calls draw close to subroutine calls in
execution speed).
> BTW, I didn't see any comments about my second thought, the one
> of inspecting compiled regexps. Did you like it? That also goes in
> the direction of exposing all the internals to the module writers...
I didn't feel qualified or entitled to comment on it since I *never*
operate at the level of the perl guts; not even in modules -- like Switch --
that may appear to do so.
Damian
