Damian wrote:
> In other words, everything that Exporter does, only with lexical
> referents not package referents. This in turn gives us the ability to
> easily write proper lexically-scoped modules.
Great! Then we don't need run-time lexical symbol table
frobbing. A BEGIN block can muck with its' callers symbol
table at compile time.
> I can image a Lexically::Verbose module, that modifies all variables and/or
> subroutines in a scope to report their own activity:
>
> while (whatever) {
> use Lexically::Verbose 'vars';
Another compile time example.
> In fact, you just invented a new pattern, in
> which a set of subroutines called within a scope can communicate invisibly
> but safely through that scope's lexical symbol table.
Hey, don't make me an accomplice in this... ;)
> Accessing lexicals will be no slower than accessing package variables
> is today.
Actually I'm not sure about that. Package variables only work well
because they have global definitions. Lexicals don't. IMHO in order
to have the speed of package variables, we'll have to make lexical
scope changes trigger a re-compile (at least a re-link) of the
affected code. Besides, I was hoping for Perl 6 lexicals to be a
great deal *faster* than package variables...
How much stuff currently depends on dynamic lexicals? (Ugh. Why
are we even *talking* about something that horrible.) If there were
a pragma to eliminate them, would it break much?
- Ken
