Re: RFCs (Re: Ideas that need RFCs?)

[Nathan Torkington]

Nathan Wiger writes:
> Anyone RFC'ing this yet?

I could RFC it in vague terms, but I'm waiting to see how things
like interfaces turn out. 

> Which reminds, anyone gonna RFC the rumored death of typeglobs? :-)

I figured that as Larry had used it as an example of things that were
up for grabs in perl6, he was already assumed to be thinking of it.
Then again, if the RFC actually thought through the current uses of
typeglobs and could show how to preserve that functionality, it
would be useful.

It's always the edge cases that need thinking through.  Any idiot (hi,
that's me!) can RFC the obvious ("write lvalue subs so that they're
passed the rvalue") but it's the edge cases ("and what about mutators
and other non-assignment lvalues, fool?") that require the thought
and are what make a great RFC (Damian's) not a crappy one (mine).

Nat