Trey Harris wrote:
In a message dated Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Richard Hainsworth writes:

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>

Oh please, no.

The entire point of the wording currently in the synopsis is so that we can have platform-independent location of libraries. The "name mangling capability" hypothesized lets the same C<use> get the requested resource, regardless of the file (or database location!) where the resource is actually located on the platform running Perl.
The reasoning for the arcane language becomes clear. My thanks.
Definitely a good idea for the implementation / implementors to decide how to get a resource magically.

But ...
I have run into situations where I wanted to have more control over where specific resources were located, at least temporarily. And I could not find a simple way to do it in perl5.

Or is there some other magic I have not understood (and there is a lot I dont understand) that would allow for this as perl6 is already specified?

Your proposal would force us to have platform-dependent locations, and hence platform-dependent programs. Do you really want to see dozens of switches like

  given $?OS {
     when m:i:/win/ { use Foo in }
     when m:i:/nix/ { use Foo in }

at the top of programs?

No. That would not be nice.

Yet, does my proposal *force* this? Is it not possible for the magical resource locator to coexist with a mechanism to allow local control?

And why would differ from They are both text files. To the extent they interact with the operating system, perl already manages manfully (no fork in Windows).

But what about
#use GetUserResponse in ''; # when debugging
use GetUserResponse in '';

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.

Yes--but better for implementators to make that decision than for each and every Perl programmer (most of whom will have no experience with most OS's Perl runs on, so will be making such decisions blind!) to make them separately (and differently).
True. Yet this implies all Perl programmers write for platform independence. My experience has been that when I was using perl under windows, I had to use ppm made available by ActiveState. Whereas for Linux, I could use CPAN directly. This indicates a conversion procedure and rules of best practice for software whose authors want it to be used cross-platform.

Reply via email to