|Problems? Is your data what you think it is?|
Re^3: getting rid of special featuresby moritz (Cardinal)
|on Feb 17, 2013 at 15:39 UTC||Need Help??|
actually I don't wanna get rid of the feature but of the syntax.
Then we are (mostly) in violent agreement.
I still think that ++ being special-cased for strings is a rather harmless example, and there is another argument for keeping it: It's nicely symmetric with how ranges of strings work:
which might be used a bit more often than direct increment on strings.
Now that we've already having this discussion, I'd like to point out some more Perl 5 features that could be reworked to much saner:
But in the long run, removing cruft is only a small part of evolving Perl 5. I firmly believe that in order to stay competitive, it needs a type system(*), proper subroutine signatures and a less bare-bones OO system in core.
(*) If the need for a type system isn't obvious to you, let me just tell you that at least 95% of all the character encoding trouble in Perl 5 could easily be avoided by having separate types for text strings and byte buffers.