In perl.perl6.stdlib, you wrote:
Er, okay, well scratch that example then :) But my point still stands: I
think Perl 6 should have some sort of guidelines in this area, even if
they're only a codification of what the majority of Perl authors do.
Yes. See also perldoc perlstyle and the
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 09:40:05AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
On 8/25/01 5:12 AM, Johan Vromans wrote:
John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you ask any Java programmer which is correct, myJavaMethod() or
My_Java_Method(), I think you'll get a straight answer.
From experience I
From: Graham Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 04:38:43PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
And allow flexible calling styles. For example, you might say:
# import args() for argument validation
use Module::Interface qw/args/;
sub my_func (@) {
my
From: Michael G Schwern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:55:37AM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
There should be ONE calling style for each sub/method.
Allowing this _will_ cause different people to use different
calling styles and also possible confusion.
It
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 02:31:47PM -0400, Kirrily Robert wrote:
Ask wrote:
On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Kirrily Robert wrote:
[...]
=head2 The role of CPAN
Will CPAN's role remain unchanged? Will there be a separate space for
Perl 6 modules (6PAN)?
If we do want to make changes to CPAN
In perl.perl6.stdlib, you wrote:
While we're at it, I think that ExtUtils:: really needs renaming.
Nobody talks about Perl extensions, they talk about modules. Or
possibly just about Perl. I actually think the stuff in ExtUtils would
be better off in Devel:: with the other developer
