I'm curious about the change from "blorst" to "blast." I quickly figured out
that "blorst" was
derived from "BLock OR STatement" (as S04 used to say: "In fact,
most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement (known as
a I<blorst> in the vernacular)).
The best that I can figure for "blast" is "BLock And STatement." But using
AND
seems less correct to me. Furthermore, "blast" is less likely to google up
the results I need.
So, what exactly _is_ the derivation of "blast"?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl>
Date: Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:34 PM
Subject: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
To: perl6-langu...@perl.org
Author: lwall
Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009)
New Revision: 29129
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
Log:
[S04] as several folks have suggested, rename "blorst" to "blast"
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod
===================================================================
--- docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-18 18:51:35 UTC (rev 29128)
+++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-19 04:34:29 UTC (rev 29129)
@@ -1226,8 +1226,8 @@
our $temphandle = START maketemp();
In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement
-(known as a I<blorst> in the vernacular).
-This can be particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped
+(known as a I<blast> in the vernacular). The statement form can be
+particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped
declaration to the surrounding context. Hence these declare the same
variables with the same scope as the preceding example, but run the
statements as a whole at the indicated time:
