May I suggest the following extension to the 'use ' pragma, viz.
use <module name written in unicode and case sensitive> in <filename as constrained by local system>


For justification, see below.

<aside>There were some hot replies to what I thought was a fairly trivial question. A corollary perhaps of an observation in "Parkinsons Law" - people on committees argue longest over the item with the smallest cost. :)</aside>

The broken operating system, or rather family of systems (and I converted away from them about three years ago), still is used by 90% of users. In practice, it does matter what happens in that environment.

But also consider, whatever operating system is in use, it has to know how by default to handle a file - interpret it as a script, run it as a native executable, pipe it to an editor or renderer etc. That information has to be associated with the file in some way. One operating system uses name extensions, another looks at the first line for a #! etc.

Personally, I find it useful to have a visible clue in the name (via an extension) as to the content of the file. This seems to me more widespread than just an OS requirement, as otherwise why have *.tar *.tar.gz *.pdf *.doc *.png etc or even .* for hidden files in unix?

If it doesnt matter - as far as perl6 is concerned - how the module is named (see Larry Wall's response regarding unicode and case-sensitivity), then the extensions too are irrelevant, no? So if I choose to call my perl6 scripts *.p6 it should not matter? Other than for the sake of tradition or conformity with the tribe's sense of propriety :)

And that brings me to another question. Should it matter what the name of the file is? For modules in perl5 as far as I can discern, the name of the module in the file name has to conform with the package name inside the script. I have found this default behaviour annoying at times.

By extending the 'use' pragma to include information about which container it can be found in, filenames become truly irrelevant. Moreover, the initiation file for a large project might just be a configuration file containing all the module names, together with "use Main <main> in ProjectDebugStage.v03"

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, some people put .pl on the end of their "scripts" because they are
running on broken operating systems.


So, I imagine, for Perl6, I'll be making the same strong recommendation
that Perl6 scripts, just like Perl5 and Perl4 scripts before them, have
*no*
extension.

Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777

Enthusiastically seconded! Why should we let the language of Mordor
corrupt our discourse?



--
Email and shopping with the feelgood factor!
55% of income to good causes. http://www.ippimail.com

Reply via email to