On Mon 28 Aug, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >> It's nearly part of Perl's language signature. I wouldn't count
> >> on this going away if you still think to call this "Perl". It is
> >> of course much more likely in the renamed "Frob" language, however.
>
> >First off, this argument is just a little too grandiose, because if we
> >can't change anything because of precedent, then we're stuck and Perl 6
> >should just be Perl 5.9 instead.
>
> How nice of you to put words in my mouth. Please cite me the precise
> message ID, date, and appropriate text in which I said "we can't
> change anything because of precedent".
This is getting a little heated and silly. (its not supposed to be p5p)
When we eventually have perl6 there will be a LONG transition time when
programs will need to work both with perl5 and perl6.
By all means suggest ADDITIONS to perl to make the programmers life easier
(all of my RFCs have been)
If you want to change STUPID behaviour that should be avoided by current
programs (such as empty regexes) fine.
If you want to take little used things out of the core such as formats,
fine provided they can simply be brought back in with a use statement or two.
If you want to change heavily used aspects of perl and ruin most programs
out there you had better come up with some really serious reasons why.
Be reasonable, be nice.
Richard
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
