Tom Christiansen responded: > One argument *against* intra-token-sequence multiline comments is that they > are harder to see, and thus render readers of the code more prone to > misunderstand it. Is this worth really promoting? <snip> > Settling on one > pod target for multiline comments, and then defining the =for and =end of > that target to implicitly =cut back to code, would seem to address both of > these issues I am prone to agree with this. I would be willing to promote the requirement of starting and ending multiline comments on their own line. Maybe something like this (this will not work in Perl 5): code to execute =# some comments to ignore =# more code to execute And this would also be more backwards similar. --Michael
- Re: Typeglobs, filehandles, asterisks Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: Typeglobs, filehandles, asterisks Matthew Persico
- Re: Typeglobs, filehandles, asterisks Chaim Frenkel
- Re: Typeglobs, filehandles, asterisks Dan Sugalski
- Re: Typeglobs, filehandles, asterisks Chaim Frenkel
- multiline comments Michael Mathews
- Re: multiline comments Tom Christiansen
- Re: multiline comments Tom Christiansen
- Re: multiline comments Michael Mathews
- Re: multiline comments Tom Christiansen
- Re: multiline comments Michael Mathews
- Re: multiline comments Buddha Buck
- Re: multiline comments Michael Mathews
- Re: multiline comments John Porter
- Re: multiline comments Bart Lateur
- Re: multiline comments John Porter
- Re: multiline comments Peter Scott
- Re: multiline comments John Porter
- Re: multiline comments John Porter
- Re: multiline comments Tom Christiansen
- Re: multiline comments Nick Ing-Simmons