Re: "deprecated" (was Re: r29143 ...)
Larry Wall wrote: On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:22:17PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote: pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: @@ -1020,22 +1018,17 @@ C<< prefix: >> -Coerces to type C. Floor semantics are used for fractional -values, including strings that appear to express fractional values. -That is, C must have the same result as C in all -cases. All implicit conversions to integer use the same semantics. +Deprecated, use the C coercion or the C function. Why would the Perl 6 spec contain anything deprecated rather than simply not having it at all? Only because it was already implemented in earlier versions of Perl 6, and someone might look it up here. Maybe it would be a good idea to add a file to the Perl 6 spec to collect things like this. The file would list features that the Perl 6 spec once had but no longer does *and* were supported by at least one Perl 6 implementation. Mention of these things can be omitted from all the other Perl 6 spec files. And so people still have somewhere to look for the question "where did that go?". Generally I'm a believer in having details relevant to the current version of a project be the only ones in the main files, and have details relevant only to past versions of the project that no longer exist be shunted to separate files. As for future plans, those also maybe should be separate but there are better excuses to sometimes make mention of them in the main files too, since in effect they are part of the current version that just haven't been fleshed out yet. -- Darren Duncan
Re: "deprecated" (was Re: r29143 ...)
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:22:17PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote: > pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: >> @@ -1020,22 +1018,17 @@ >> C<< prefix: >> >> -Coerces to type C. Floor semantics are used for fractional >> -values, including strings that appear to express fractional values. >> -That is, C must have the same result as C in all >> -cases. All implicit conversions to integer use the same semantics. >> +Deprecated, use the C coercion or the C function. > > Why would the Perl 6 spec contain anything deprecated rather than simply > not having it at all? Only because it was already implemented in earlier versions of Perl 6, and someone might look it up here. > Or do you mean "deprecated" as in the parser will explicitly recognize it > and die with a helpful error message, such as it does for Perl 5's "=~" > to catch brainos? Nope, that'll tend to either work anyway with int() or fail with two terms in a row for int $x. It might be worth a special message I suppose. > If you mean the latter, is there some central place (say in Synopsis 2) > that talks about this, such as in a "terminology" section? "When the > Perl 6 spec uses the word ... it means ..." You must think I'm writing a *real* spec. :) Larry
