Mailing List Archive

PSC #095: 2023-01-27
A busy meeting today, we talked about quite a few things:

* Smartmatch deprecation continues. Some upstream PRs have been
raised, awaiting CPAN releases

* Refaliasing might be able to be deëxperimentalized if we add a
warning on the currently-failing closure capture cases

* RFC0013 highlights a deficiency in the `overload.pm` API shape.
Perhaps an opt-in new calling convention is required to make it more
flexible
- Paul will write another post to the mailing list with more detail

* Mithaldu's objection to the suggestion to deprecate `map EXPR, LIST`
suggests that maybe a more powerful debugger "run until next
statement" command would be good

* The interaction of `List::Keywords` + `autovivification` highlights
the overall problem with highly-pluggable extensible systems -
sometimes extensions conflict. We just have to keep this in mind and
not have too high expectations that "everything will be fine if we
load 20 different plugins"

* That said, maybe there are some CPAN extensions that ought to be
part of the core language - `autovivification` for example

* We've run out of devel release volunteers now. We need some people
to volunteer for 5.37.9, .10, .11, (maybe .12?). Also maybe 5.38.0

--
Paul "LeoNerd" Evans

leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/
RE: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
> * Refaliasing might be able to be de?xperimentalized if we add a
> warning on the currently-failing closure capture cases

The word "deëxperimentalized" follows French rules. Is it possible to switch to Estonian diactrics please please?
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 05:45:55PM +0000, Perl 5 Porters wrote:
> > * Refaliasing might be able to be de?xperimentalized if we add a
> > warning on the currently-failing closure capture cases
>
> The word "de?xperimentalized" follows French rules. Is it possible
> to switch to Estonian diactrics please please?

I'd expect the French version to be something like "d?sexp?riment?".
(And it's definitely not how one would say "stripped of its
experimental status".)

--
Philippe Bruhat (BooK)

Even the worst guesser is right once in a while.
(Moral from Groo The Wanderer #72 (Epic))
RE: Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 05:45:55PM +0000, Perl 5 Porters wrote:
> > > * Refaliasing might be able to be de?xperimentalized if we add a
> > > warning on the currently-failing closure capture cases
> >
> > The word "de?xperimentalized" follows French rules. Is it possible to
> > switch to Estonian diactrics please please?
>
> I'd expect the French version to be something like "d?sexp?riment?".
> (And it's
> definitely not how one would say "stripped of its experimental status".)

I haven't meant translation to French.
In French you place diaeresis to avoid creating diphthong pair
In German, it means different vowel.

In Perl, I would expect avoiding diaeresis at all, so deexperimentalized instead of deëxperimentalized
What the benefit of placing "ë" instead of "e"? does it follow English rules at all?

Interestingly, sometimes people place diaeresis on 2nd repeated vowel, however diphthong are more than that, and
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
~ * We've run out of devel release volunteers now. We need some people to
volunteer for 5.37.9, .10, .11, (maybe .12?). Also maybe 5.38.0

I'd volunteer for a dev release but I don't know how to, and I don't have a
prior experience regarding this.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 9:14 PM Paul "LeoNerd" Evans <leonerd@leonerd.org.uk>
wrote:

> A busy meeting today, we talked about quite a few things:
>
> * Smartmatch deprecation continues. Some upstream PRs have been
> raised, awaiting CPAN releases
>
> * Refaliasing might be able to be deëxperimentalized if we add a
> warning on the currently-failing closure capture cases
>
> * RFC0013 highlights a deficiency in the `overload.pm` API shape.
> Perhaps an opt-in new calling convention is required to make it more
> flexible
> - Paul will write another post to the mailing list with more detail
>
> * Mithaldu's objection to the suggestion to deprecate `map EXPR, LIST`
> suggests that maybe a more powerful debugger "run until next
> statement" command would be good
>
> * The interaction of `List::Keywords` + `autovivification` highlights
> the overall problem with highly-pluggable extensible systems -
> sometimes extensions conflict. We just have to keep this in mind and
> not have too high expectations that "everything will be fine if we
> load 20 different plugins"
>
> * That said, maybe there are some CPAN extensions that ought to be
> part of the core language - `autovivification` for example
>
> * We've run out of devel release volunteers now. We need some people
> to volunteer for 5.37.9, .10, .11, (maybe .12?). Also maybe 5.38.0
>
> --
> Paul "LeoNerd" Evans
>
> leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
> http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/
>
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023, at 08:50, Vadim V Konovalov via perl5-porters wrote:
> In Perl, I would expect avoiding diaeresis at all, so deexperimentalized instead of deëxperimentalized
> What the benefit of placing "ë" instead of "e"? does it follow English rules at all?

A diaeresis is sometimes (rarely, these days) put over a vowel to indicate that the vowel should be pronounced, and not treated as modifying another vowel.

In the city of Coopersburg, the first four letters are pronounced like a chicken coop. In coöperate, each of the first two "o"s are pronounced individually. The first (and only) vowel sound in "reeve" is a long e sound, but in reënter, each of the first two "e"s are pronounced individually. In the name of Charlotte Brontë, we know her name is Brawn-te, not Bro?nt. In naïve, we know it's ny-eeve, not nayve.

Using diaereses this way is now uncommon, but is actual English usage with a long history. (There is a sort of joke that the only people who do this, these days, work at The New Yorker magazine. That said, I don't believe that Paul works there.)

--
rjbs
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
* Elvin Aslanov <rwp.primary@gmail.com> [2023-01-28 17:53:21 +0400]:

> ~ * We've run out of devel release volunteers now. We need some people to
> volunteer for 5.37.9, .10, .11, (maybe .12?). Also maybe 5.38.0
>
> I'd volunteer for a dev release but I don't know how to, and I don't have a
> prior experience regarding this.

That makes two of us. I am happy to participate in some process training with
others who desire to same training and some mentors to help move us along.

Cheers,
Brett

>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 9:14 PM Paul "LeoNerd" Evans <leonerd@leonerd.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > A busy meeting today, we talked about quite a few things:
> >
> > * Smartmatch deprecation continues. Some upstream PRs have been
> > raised, awaiting CPAN releases
> >
> > * Refaliasing might be able to be de?xperimentalized if we add a
> > warning on the currently-failing closure capture cases
> >
> > * RFC0013 highlights a deficiency in the `overload.pm` API shape.
> > Perhaps an opt-in new calling convention is required to make it more
> > flexible
> > - Paul will write another post to the mailing list with more detail
> >
> > * Mithaldu's objection to the suggestion to deprecate `map EXPR, LIST`
> > suggests that maybe a more powerful debugger "run until next
> > statement" command would be good
> >
> > * The interaction of `List::Keywords` + `autovivification` highlights
> > the overall problem with highly-pluggable extensible systems -
> > sometimes extensions conflict. We just have to keep this in mind and
> > not have too high expectations that "everything will be fine if we
> > load 20 different plugins"
> >
> > * That said, maybe there are some CPAN extensions that ought to be
> > part of the core language - `autovivification` for example
> >
> > * We've run out of devel release volunteers now. We need some people
> > to volunteer for 5.37.9, .10, .11, (maybe .12?). Also maybe 5.38.0
> >
> > --
> > Paul "LeoNerd" Evans
> >
> > leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS
> > http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/
> >

--
--
oodler@cpan.org
oodler577@sdf-eu.org
SDF-EU Public Access UNIX System - http://sdfeu.org
irc.perl.org #openmp #pdl #native
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, 00:34 Ricardo Signes, <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org>
wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023, at 08:50, Vadim V Konovalov via perl5-porters wrote:
>
> In Perl, I would expect avoiding diaeresis at all, so deexperimentalized
> instead of deëxperimentalized
> What the benefit of placing "ë" instead of "e"? does it follow English
> rules at all?
>
>
> A diaeresis is sometimes (rarely, these days) put over a vowel to indicate
> that the vowel should be pronounced, and not treated as modifying another
> vowel.
>
> In the city of Coopersburg, the first four letters are pronounced like a
> chicken coop. In coöperate, each of the first two "o"s are pronounced
> individually. The first (and only) vowel sound in "reeve" is a long e
> sound, but in reënter, each of the first two "e"s are pronounced
> individually. In the name of Charlotte Brontë, we know her name is
> Brawn-te, not Bro?nt. In naïve, we know it's ny-eeve, not nayve.
>
> Using diaereses this way is now uncommon, but is actual English usage with
> a long history. (There is a sort of joke that the only people who do this,
> these days, work at The New Yorker magazine. That said, I don't believe
> that Paul works there.)
>

TIL. Interesting, thanks.

Yves
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
On 2023-01-29 03:18, demerphq wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, 00:34 Ricardo Signes, <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org>
> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023, at 08:50, Vadim V Konovalov via
> perl5-porters wrote:
>> In Perl, I would expect avoiding diaeresis at all, so
>> deexperimentalized instead of deëxperimentalized
>> What the benefit of placing "ë" instead of "e"? does it follow
>> English rules at all?
>
> A diaeresis is sometimes (rarely, these days) put over a vowel to
> indicate that the vowel should be pronounced, and not treated as
> modifying another vowel.
>
> In the city of Coopersburg, the first four letters are pronounced
> like a chicken coop.  In coöperate, each of the first two "o"s are
> pronounced individually.  The first (and only) vowel sound in
> "reeve" is a long e sound, but in reënter, each of the first two
> "e"s are pronounced individually.  In the name of Charlotte
> Brontë, we know her name is Brawn-te, not Bro?nt.  In naïve, we
> know it's ny-eeve, not nayve.
>
> Using diaereses this way is now uncommon, but is actual English
> usage with a long history.  (There is a sort of joke that the only
> people who do this, these days, work at The New Yorker magazine. 
> That said, I don't believe that Paul works there.)
>
>
> TIL. Interesting,  thanks.
>

There is the Umlaut and there is the Diaeresis.
They look much the same nowadays, but have different backgrounds.

An Umlaut(zeichen) got written as a second vowel on top of the initial
vowel, in handwriting.
An Umlaut signals a "sound shift", so "change(d) sound", "make sound
differently".

A diaeresis is more like a hyphen, a sign to split up vowels, an
innerword-space. It also went up, but over the second vowel.

They have the same Unicode codepoint, which to me feels like a loss.

-- Ruud
Re: PSC #095: 2023-01-27 [ In reply to ]
Hi there,

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023, Ruud H.G. van Tol via perl5-porters wrote:

> ...
> There is the Umlaut and there is the Diaeresis.
> ...
> They have the same Unicode codepoint, which to me feels like a loss.

+1

I feel the same way about the Greek letter '?'.

--

73,
Ged.