In any case, for the whole "future compatability" issue, which would be prefered, double colon in the string, semicolon separating strings, or null characters in strings?
The PIR syntax.pod file says that nested namespaces can be used by
separating namespaces with a semicolon, ala nested array/hash
structures. But the common writing convention seems to be along the
lines of perl5 packages with a double colon to separate. After looking
at the "find_global Foo::Bar::baz" test in t/pmc/namespace.t, I suppose
it's easily understandable that without a change to the find_global
opcode to allow a similar syntax to getting and setting array/hash
values that the double colon is preferable. All of the files in the
runtime/parrot/library directory use the :: method. A quick grep on
partcl seems to use both the double colon in a string and a null
character in a string, including multiple null characters. Although
it's "clipped", pdd06 says namespaces should be separated with a double
colon.
- A quick(doubtfully simple) namespace question Joshua Isom
- Re: A quick(doubtfully simple) namespace question Leopold Toetsch
