Re: [rt.cpan.org #55602] Bug #12239 was a mistake (nested formatting codes)

On Mar 15, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote:

> Is there anyone who can provide a reading of the spec to support the change?
> Do you (David) remember what part of the spec convinced you?

When I made the change, I wasn't aware of the spec, but based the change on `perlpod`, particularly this bit:

>            C<<< $a <=> $b >>>
>            C<<<<  $a <=> $b     >>>>
> 
>        And they all mean exactly the same as this:
> 
>            C<$a E<lt>=E<gt> $b>
> 
>        As a further example, this means that if you wanted to put these bits
>        of code in "C" (code) style:
> 
>            open(X, ">>thing.dat") || die $!
>            $foo−>bar();
> 
>        you could do it like so:
> 
>            C<<< open(X, ">>thing.dat") || die $! >>>
>            C<< $foo−>bar(); >>
> 
>        which is presumably easier to read than the old way:
> 
>            C<open(X, "E<gt>E<gt>thing.dat") || die $!>
>            C<$foo−E<gt>bar();>

My interpretation of that was that any angle brackets inside should be considered literal, and thus escaped. The whole point of `<<   >>` AFAICS was to allow one to use literal brackets without escaping them, as one must do in `<>`.

Best,

David