Mailing List Archive: Perl: porters

[PATCH] Add ..., !!!, and ??? operators

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

chromatic at wgz

May 10, 2008, 12:52 PM

Post #1 of 3 (137 views)
Permalink

[PATCH] Add ..., !!!, and ??? operators

Per a TODO in pod/perltodo.pod, here's a patch that adds the yada, yada, yada
operators. It includes documentation and a test file (attached, not part of
the patch).

As Ben Morrow points out, this version has a slight incompatibility with the
match operator ?? nestled up against the ternary conditional operator without
intervening whitespace. I suspect that a bit of opcode rewriting would work,
if there's sufficient lookhead... but that's more work than I want to do at
the moment.

-- c

Attachments:

yadayada_docs_tests.patch (4.11 KB)

yadatests.patch (1.22 KB)

rgarciasuarez at gmail

May 10, 2008, 1:22 PM

Post #2 of 3 (127 views)
Permalink

Re: [PATCH] Add ..., !!!, and ??? operators [In reply to]

2008/5/10 chromatic <chromatic[at]wgz.org>:
> Per a TODO in pod/perltodo.pod, here's a patch that adds the yada, yada, yada
> operators. It includes documentation and a test file (attached, not part of
> the patch).

Woot.

> As Ben Morrow points out, this version has a slight incompatibility with the
> match operator ?? nestled up against the ternary conditional operator without
> intervening whitespace. I suspect that a bit of opcode rewriting would work,
> if there's sufficient lookhead... but that's more work than I want to do at
> the moment.

I don't see an easy way out for this one. But that's the kind of
incompatibility we can live with. (Like the incompatibility with
applying three times the negation operator to a term.)

rgarciasuarez at gmail

May 18, 2008, 2:08 PM

Post #3 of 3 (95 views)
Permalink

Re: [PATCH] Add ..., !!!, and ??? operators [In reply to]

2008/5/10 chromatic <chromatic[at]wgz.org>:
> Per a TODO in pod/perltodo.pod, here's a patch that adds the yada, yada, yada
> operators. It includes documentation and a test file (attached, not part of
> the patch).
>
> As Ben Morrow points out, this version has a slight incompatibility with the
> match operator ?? nestled up against the ternary conditional operator without
> intervening whitespace. I suspect that a bit of opcode rewriting would work,
> if there's sufficient lookhead... but that's more work than I want to do at
> the moment.

Thanks, applied as #33858.

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com