Re^9: Perl 5.11.0 now available

Due to the commutativity breakage, code references are no longer treated specially when appearing on the left of the ~~ operator,

Re-read that original in the light of your new insight and ask yourself:

Is the breakage, commutative?
Are code references no longer treated specially because the breakage is commutative?

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

RIP PCW It is as I've been saying!(Audio until 20090817)

Comment on Re^9: Perl 5.11.0 now available

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: Perl 5.11.0 now available by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 04, 2009 at 16:32 UTC
No to both. Nothing is said about the breakage. It is not said to be commutative. What new insight? I've been saying the same thing since my first post.	[reply]
Re^11: Perl 5.11.0 now available by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 04, 2009 at 22:01 UTC
Bottom line. After all this discussion, you are convinced that there is no better way to phrase that sentence? If you have any doubts, my purpose in drawing attention to it is served. Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. RIP PCW It is as I've been saying!(Audio until 20090817)	[reply]
Re^12: Perl 5.11.0 now available by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 04, 2009 at 23:14 UTC
"Commutativity breakage" should probably be "commutativity's breakage", which can also be written as "breakage of commutativity". I was going to include a change to the latter in the aforementioned patch. Suggestions welcome.	[reply]
Re^13: Perl 5.11.0 now available by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 04, 2009 at 23:54 UTC
Re^10: Perl 5.11.0 now available by massa (Hermit) on Oct 04, 2009 at 12:30 UTC
Are you being dense on purpose?? `Commutativity Breakage != Commutative Breakage` [download] (which would be the answer to your question #1) `Commutativity Breakage == Breakage of the Commutativity` [download] i. e., the commutativity (Of the `~~` operator) is broken, or IOW, is not working anymore. And, because the commutativity is not working anymore, code references are no longer treated specially. (They were treated specially before, because the `~~` operator was commutative). Easier to parse now? []s, HTH, Massa (κς,πμ,πλ)	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^11: Perl 5.11.0 now available by Anonymous Monk on Oct 04, 2009 at 13:36 UTC
Commutativity Breakage != Commutative Breakage As adverbs are often being used to clarfiy "in what way?", commutatively broken (as BU said) could well mean "the operator is broken with respect to its commutativity", and not "Commutative Breakage", which doesn't make sense in the context.	[reply]


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks