Think about Loose Coupling | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
My point is the huffman-coding principle.
Incrementing numeric indices happens maybe 1_000 or even 1_000_000 times more often than incrementing strings. So for integers this operator has to be short. But the effort to learn and maintain string_increment with a core operator like ++ is far less economic. For that reason I agree that strinc() (or whatever notation suits the most) would pollute the namespace like in PHP, so it should be outsourced to a pragma or module. The inverse approach would be the 'no feature qwinc' I proposed, forcing ++ to croak on strings and allowing full backwards compatibility. Furthermore allowing optimizations within Perl and less headaches and far more performance when translating to other VMs.
Cheers Rolf In reply to Re^4: getting rid of special features
by LanX
|
|