Damian Conway wrote:
> It's not yet committed, as there will (no doubt) be much discussion
> first. I apologize in advance: I am still travelling on my annual world
> tour, so my ability to participate in this discussion will be limited
> and erratic.

In the spirit of "ask for forgiveness rather than permission" I'd
suggest to commit it early. People on #perl6 have been asking where it
is already, since it's not at the usual location[tm].

> Of course, all comments, suggestions, and patches are most welcome.

Then let me start with a huge praise: to me it seems much more practical
to the Pod writer than the previous version. I appreciate the huge
effort that has surely flown into it.

However it seems we have to pay a price: each act of rendering a Pod
file actually means executing the program that's being documented (at
least the BEGIN blocks and other stuff that happens at compile time),
with all the security risks implied. So we'll need a *very* good
sandbox. Is that worth it?

Two minor comments:

ll 99:
    followed by a valid identifierN<
        A valid identifier is a sequence of alphanumerics and/or
        underscores, beginning with an alphabetic or underscore

Is there a good reason to deviate from Perl 6's definition of an
identifier? For the sake of consistentcy I'd just say that the Perl 6 rules

ll 311:
    sub fu (             #= This text stored in C<&fu.WHY>

This seems to be ignorant of multi subs. If I write

    multi sub fu () {    #= some Pod

Then &fu is a multi, not a particular candidate. Does it actually attach to
the .WHY of the candidate? Or of the multi?


Reply via email to