I would disagree. The ability to parallelise in perl6 is an awesome reason to leave EO undefined. Defining EO necessarily serialises statements, which would prevent future perl interpreters from automatically threading inside single, complex statements, and thus gaining huge amounts of efficiency on multi-processor systems.
This is more than a good reason, and has been offered.
Perl, as it is today, probably does not benefit from undefined EO. Perl as it may be in the future, would be hamstrung by an attempt today to define EO, as we would not be able to offer backwards compatability. True, perl6 does not offer backwards compatability with perl5. But who says perl 5.12 won't finally have a working, stable threading system built-in, and be able to use it?
In reply to Re^23: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined?
by Tanktalus
in thread Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined?
by BrowserUk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |