I think that if you're considering using signatures make sure you read this first
http://www.effectiveperlprogramming.com/2015/04/use-v5-20-subroutine-signatures/ The bottom line is that they're experimental so you should expect that your code will need some modifications as new Perl releases come out. Choosing whether to use signatures should therefore be determined by the how rigorous your release testing is, and how critical the dependencies are. Andrew On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Brandon McCaig <bamcc...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Alex Becker <asb.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > Perl now has subroutine signatures. However, they are marked as > experimental > > feature. > > As I really like it, I'm always tempted to use it. > > On the other hand, I don't want to wast efforts to something I have to > roll > > back. > > > > So, does anyone know the tendency if signatures are going to stay? > > > > I'm not looking for the standard "do if you want to do it because > TIMTOWTDI" > > answer, it will not help me. I'm looking for rumors, or eventually an > > assessment from the people who did the feature? > > This is either the first I've heard of this or I just drink too much. > One thing that I notice is that the "Signatures" section seems quite > early and long in the perlsub documentation for such an experimental > and new feature. I know that when I first learned Perl (which was 5.x) > I did so largely by reading the core perldocs almost like a tutorial. > Reading the perlsub now I might quickly forget that signatures are > experimental after glossing over the warning and relating the sizable > signatures documentation to other languages. A beginner to Perl might > consider that the norm or recommended option (after their nightly beer > erases the whole "experimental" disclaimer). It seems to me that > "Signatures" should be towards the end (I mean, do experienced Perl > programmers go to these core documents to discover new features or > hear about them from mailing lists and the like and then look them up > explicitly as I did!?). > > As for rumors, this is the first that I've heard of it, but it sounds > like a relatively safe feature to use assuming they haven't overlooked > anything critical in terms of parsing the signature from the language. > And I can't imagine anything that would break it. It's probably safe > assuming you can require such a modern perl. > > Regards, > > > -- > Brandon McCaig <bamcc...@gmail.com> <bamcc...@castopulence.org> > Castopulence Software <https://www.castopulence.org/> > Blog <http://www.bambams.ca/> > perl -E '$_=q{V zrna gur orfg jvgu jung V fnl. }. > q{Vg qbrfa'\''g nyjnlf fbhaq gung jnl.}; > tr/A-Ma-mN-Zn-z/N-Zn-zA-Ma-m/;say' > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@perl.org > For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-h...@perl.org > http://learn.perl.org/ > > > -- Andrew Solomon Mentor@Geekuni http://geekuni.com/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/asolomon
