Author: larry
Date: Thu Feb 22 12:51:15 2007
New Revision: 13700
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
More Y XX -> Z X clarifications
Now allow "constant $?TABSTOP = 4" syntax for user to set compiler variables.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==============================================================================
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod (original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod Thu Feb 22 12:51:15 2007
@@ -12,9 +12,9 @@
Maintainer: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Aug 2004
- Last Modified: 15 Feb 2007
+ Last Modified: 22 Feb 2007
Number: 2
- Version: 88
+ Version: 89
This document summarizes Apocalypse 2, which covers small-scale
lexical items and typological issues. (These Synopses also contain
@@ -1567,12 +1567,25 @@
in fact be dynamically scoped within the compiler itself, and only
appear to be lexically scoped because dynamic scopes of the compiler
resolve to lexical scopes of the program. All C<$?> variables are considered
-constants, and may not be modified after being compiled in.
+constants, and may not be modified after being compiled in. The user
+is also allowed to define or (redefine) such constants:
+
+ constant $?TABSTOP = 4; # assume heredoc tabs mean 4 spaces
+
+(Note that the constant declarator always evaluates its initialization
+expression at compile time.)
C<$?FILE> and C<$?LINE> are your current file and line number, for
instance. C<?> is not a shortcut for a package name like C<*> is.
-Instead of C<$?OUTER::SUB> you probably want to write C<< OUTER::<$?SUB>
->>.
+Instead of C<$?OUTER::SUB> you probably want to write C<< OUTER::<$?SUB> >>.
+Within code that is being run during the compile, such as BEGIN blocks,
+or macro bodies, or constant initializers, the compiler variables must
+be referred to as C<< COMPILING<$?LINE> >> if the bare C<$?LINE> would
+be taken to be the value during the compilation of the currently running
+code rather than the eventual code of the user's compilation unit. For
+instance, within a macro body C<$?LINE> is the line within the macro
+body, but C<< COMPILING::<$?LINE> >> is the line where the macro was invoked.
+See below for more about the C<COMPILING> pseudo package.
Here are some possibilities:
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
==============================================================================
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod (original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod Thu Feb 22 12:51:15 2007
@@ -1107,6 +1107,13 @@
('a', '1'), ('a', '2'), ('b', '1'), ('b', '2')
+This becomes a flat list in C<@> context and a list of arrays in C<@@> context:
+
+ say @(<a b> X <1 2>)
+ 'a', '1', 'a', '2', 'b', '1', 'b', '2'
+ say @@(<a b> X <1 2>)
+ ['a', '1'], ['a', '2'], ['b', '1'], ['b', '2']
+
=item *
Cross hyperoperators
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
==============================================================================
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod (original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod Thu Feb 22 12:51:15 2007
@@ -1518,7 +1518,7 @@
right ** = $a op ($b op $c) **
non cmp <=> .. ILLEGAL cmp
chain == eq ~~ ($a op $b) and ($b op $c) eqv
- list | & ^ ¥ op($a, $b, $c) |
+ list | & ^ Z op($a; $b; $c) |
Note that operators "C<equiv>" to relationals are automatically considered
chaining operators. When creating a new precedence level, the chaining
