Re: RFC 164 (v1) Replace =~, !~, m//, and s/// with match() and subst()

Make your suggestions. But I think it is all off-base. None of this  is
addressing some improvement in working conditions, ease of use, problems
in the language, etc.

<RANT>
You are addressing stylistic issues. Issues that effect the way _I_ want
to work with the language. All of you are being fascist. Fine be fascist
but don't impose them on me.

I don't see anything broken here. MJD's // killer RFC is a headache.
Named assignments in a regex solves a known problem. I don't see
how this solves an already existing problem.
</RANT>

*sigh*
<chaim>

>>>>> "MM" == Michael Maraist <[email protected]> writes:

>> If you want to change STUPID behaviour that should be avoided by current
>> programs (such as empty regexes) fine.

MM> Simple solution.

MM> If you want to require formats such as m/.../ (which I actually think is a
MM> good idea), then make it part of -w, -W, -ww, or -WW, which would be a perl6
MM> enhancement of strictness.

MM> Likewise, things like legacy Formats would not be allowed in -WW.  This
MM> gives flexibility to the programmer, and can help the interpreter to make
MM> optimizations where necessary.

MM> If you needed legacy module compatibility, then maybe we should use pragmas
MM> like the following:

MM> use 6.0;

MM> or

MM> use 6.0 ':no-compat';

MM> Programs and modules could assign themselves to a compatibility contract
MM> (lacking the require statement defaults to perl5 compat).  The reason for
MM> having 'use' instead of 'require' is that the interpreter can turn on
MM> compile-time warnings / optimizations as it goes from module to module.

MM> Maybe this should be an RFC.

MM> -Michael






-- 
Chaim Frenkel					     Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[email protected]				               +1-718-236-0183