in reply to perl6: Switch, another case (pun intended) for unscoped eval

Switch is implemented with source filters, so it doesn't have the same set of issuee as you're facing. (as it's a compile-time source transform rather than a runtime twiddling of things) You might want to take a look at source filters--they're generally more appropriate for new syntax than runtime options.

Which doesn't mean scopeless evals are bad, of course. :)

  • Comment on Re: perl6: Switch, another case (pun indented) for scopeless eval

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: perl6: Switch, another case (pun intended) for unscoped eval
by stefp (Vicar) on Jul 12, 2002 at 18:25 UTC
    Certainly enums should be programmed as a filter since stacking filters is allowed.

    After filtering by Switch, my program becomes what is listed below and the subroutine Switch::case is called with my regexp as parameter. So, my bad, this seems to be a case for unscoped sub instead of unscoped eval. BTW: I am peeking at parrot and is positively impressed.

    use Carp; sub enum { my @enum = split /,/, $_[0]; my $i = 0; for ( @enum ) { S_W_I_T_C_H: while (1) { local $::_S_W_I_T_C_H; Switch::switch ( +$_); if (Switch::case qr/([A-Z]+\d*)(?:\s*=\s*(\d)+)?/i){ while (1) +{ m/([A-Z]+\d*)(?:\s*=\s*(\d)+)?/i; no strict; $i = $2 if defined $2; eval "sub $1() { $i }"; $i++; ;last S_W_I_T_C_H } continue { goto C_A_S_E_1 } last S_W_I_T_C_H; +C_A_S_E_1: } else { croak qq(bad enum member syntax: "$_") } }continue {last} } } enum "INFIX, PREFIX=4, SUFFIX" ; print INFIX(), ":", PREFIX(), ":", SUFFIX(), "\n";

    -- stefp -- check out TeXmacs wiki