Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-04 Thread Piers Cawley
Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 06:15:48PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > If I could, I would VETO! > > > > This would break about 90% of my scripts. I use the same name for different > > type of variables to group them: > > Why ? Remember there will (hopeful

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-03 Thread Ted Ashton
Thus it was written in the epistle of Andy Wardley, > > I'm not assaulting Perl's flexibility or syntax. Nor am I suggesting > that you, Randal or anyone else is particularly confused by this. I'm > simply making a Request For Comments on a suggestion on how some of > Perl's syntax might be mad

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-03 Thread Andy Wardley
On Aug 3, 8:32am, Simon Cozens wrote: > This is the rationale? Sounds a bit of assault on Perl's flexibility for this > little gain. As Randal said, there's no teaching advantage in it. Strictly speaking, the rationale was in this part: Although it can be argued that this is logical and con

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-03 Thread Andy Wardley
On Aug 2, 4:37pm, Ted Ashton wrote: > With all due respect, it appears that you are trading two characters for > six with little to show for it. Currently, we have > @array -- the array as a whole [...] > $array__list -- the array as a whole I didn't make that part clear. I was simply

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread Simon Cozens
On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 04:32:40PM +0100, Andy Wardley wrote: > This would permit the rationalisation and simplification of the syntax > required to access individual elements or slices of arrays and hash arrays, > while remaining backwardly compatible with Perl5 syntax. This is the rationale? So

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread Ted Ashton
Thus it was written in the epistle of Andy Wardley, > > $foo -> $foo > %foo -> $foo__hash > @foo -> $foo__list Andy, With all due respect, it appears that you are trading two characters for six with little to show for it. Currently, we have @array -- the array as a whole $ar

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread Nathan Torkington
John Porter writes: > > But perl's not any other language. Perl's fun. most other > > languages are not. > Perl5 is not going away. > Let's make a better language while we have the opportunity. Relax, you two. Better doesn't have to exclude fun. If you're dead set against highlander types, the

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread John Porter
H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > But perl's not any other language. Perl's fun. most other languages are not. Perl5 is not going away. Let's make a better language while we have the opportunity. -- John Porter

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread H . Merijn Brand
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:03:51 -0400, John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Randal L. Schwartz wrote: > : > > I don't see a teaching advantage in saying "the three variable > > namespaces are all one, but all the other namespaces are distinct". > > When the rule gets longer, it gets harder to teac

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread John Porter
Randal L. Schwartz wrote: > John> Imho, this is A Bad Practice. Making it impossible would therefore > John> be Good, existing-script-breakage not withstanding. > > So you'll break $ARGV and @ARGV? Is that really OK? Yep. > And will you extend this to ensuring that scalars, arrays, hashes,

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread H . Merijn Brand
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:29:41 -0400, John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > > > If I could, I would VETO! > > If I could, I would mandate this change. This is definitely in my > Top 10 List of Perl 5 Suckinesses. So here we differ. That's what discussions are for. >

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread Randal L. Schwartz
> "John" == John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> Imho, this is A Bad Practice. Making it impossible would therefore John> be Good, existing-script-breakage not withstanding. So you'll break $ARGV and @ARGV? Is that really OK? And will you extend this to ensuring that scalars, ar

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread John Porter
H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > If I could, I would VETO! If I could, I would mandate this change. This is definitely in my Top 10 List of Perl 5 Suckinesses. > This would break about 90% of my scripts. Some large percentage of your scripts is going to break anyway. > I use the same name for dif

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread Graham Barr
On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 06:15:48PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > If I could, I would VETO! > > This would break about 90% of my scripts. I use the same name for different > type of variables to group them: Why ? Remember there will (hopefully) be translation from perl5->perl6 so this could pote

Re: RFC: Highlander Variables

2000-08-02 Thread H . Merijn Brand
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:32:40 +0100 (BST), Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > =head1 TITLE > > Highlander Variables > > =head1 VERSION > > Maintainer: Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 01 Aug 2000 > Version: 1.0 > Mailing List: perl6-language > Number: TBA >