Mailing List Archive

On Sun, 03 Oct 2021 16:11:26 -0400
"Ricardo Signes" <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote:

> I wanted to provide a run-through of where I think we're at right now
> with a number of things that have been proposed or discussed. The
> contentious change freeze is set for January 1, 2021.

In addition to that, a couple of things on my personal plate:

* Now that `defer {}` is available I want to extend try/catch to
permit try/catch/finally, using basically the same mechanism that
defer uses. I don't imagine that'll be contentious though

* What is almost certain to at least raise some eyebrows, would be my
PL_infix_plugin branch, which allows XS::Parse::Infix to work, and
by extension the growing collection of "interesting infix operators"
I have as CPAN experiments. Namely,

https://metacpan.org/pod/Syntax::Operator::Equ
https://metacpan.org/pod/Syntax::Operator::Zip
https://metacpan.org/pod/Syntax::Operator::Divides

and also a Syntax::Operator::In which is so far /so/ experimental
I apparently haven't even put it on CPAN yet.. I thought I had.
Hrm..

I don't quite have anything ready for review to think about merging
to core *yet* though, because I don't think it's had enough features
or battle-testing to justify suggesting that yet.

If we're saying Jan 1st is the contentious freeze, I may have to
step up the pace on that a bit and see where I can get things to by
then...

> Who, if anybody, would like to take on any of these?

I could probably take a look at at least some of them *if nobody else
does*, but I have plenty of other interesting things on my plate just
at the moment that I'd prefer someone (anyone? (be careful what you
wish for) ) else to do them.

Happy to provide some hand-holding on them if someone wants to
volunteer themselves though.

--
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans

leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/

> On Oct 3, 2021, at 16:12, Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org
> use v5.36 means ASCII only: seems generally accepted, no code yet
I’d be interested in taking a stab at this, but could anyone possibly “bootstrap” the effort with pointers on where the relevant controls are?

I’ve got several irons in the real-world fire at present, but this is something I’d quite like to see happen.

-FG

I see no mention of the changes for formally marking scalars as logical
booleans, so does that mean its merged and done and a sure thing? -- Darren Duncan

On 2021-10-03 1:11 p.m., Ricardo Signes wrote:
> Porters,
>
> I wanted to provide a run-through of where I think we're at right now with a
> number of things that have been proposed or discussed.  The contentious change
> freeze is set for January 1, 2021.  I'll also be posting a summary of status of
> various ongoing experiments, soon.
>
> * *use v5.36 means ASCII only**:* seems generally accepted, no code yet
> * *make postderef_qq default-on:* we have a plan, no code yet
> * *rationalizing use vX-with-no-strict: *we have a plan, no code yet
> * *foreach (VARS) (LIST):* implemented, waiting to merge?
> * *deprecate defined/exists on array elements:*  contentious
>
> With a few of the above, the ship we're in is "we seem to have agreed to do
> something, but no one has stepped forward to say they'd do it.  While the "we
> have a plan and no code" items are things I am personally in favor of, you may
> recall that I basically don't write C code, and so you can't count on me, here.
>
> Who, if anybody, would like to take on any of these?
>
> --
> rjbs

On Sun, Oct 3, 2021, at 9:42 PM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> I see no mention of the changes for formally marking scalars as logical
> booleans, so does that mean its merged and done and a sure thing? -- Darren Duncan

My email should not be taken to imply anything about that. It just wasn't on my list of things I'm keeping an eye on especially.

--
rjbs

On Sun, 3 Oct 2021 18:42:58 -0700
Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net> wrote:

> I see no mention of the changes for formally marking scalars as
> logical booleans, so does that mean its merged and done and a sure
> thing? -- Darren Duncan

That change itself is merged.

Still something of an outstanding question how to expose it to
pureperl, whether that's by way of the Scalar::Util::isbool() function,
or adding something new to the new std/functions/builtins space, and
how it might play with the wider ideas of better intention tracking of
numbers-vs-strings... Also maybe thoughts of new `true` and `false`
keywords.

All those parts are still to do.

--
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans

leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/