Re^5: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration?

I put the strict there even when using 5.12 or above because it documents what’s going on, and because I alas find myself downgrading to 5.10.1 now and again, and don’t want to lose things.

In general, I’m for several reasons opposed to non‐pragmas diddling their caller’s scope’s lexical hints in non‐obvious ways unrelated to that module’s purpose; that’s just too Acme:: for my tastes. But I do consider use 5.012 a pragma — that is, a compiler declaration that can alter the rules of engagement.

And no, the necessary binmoding of DATA is triggered neither by use utf8 nor by use open ":utf8". Go figger. 😾

I have as little to do with UTF‑16 as I possibly can. 🙈 🙉 🙊 Anything that makes me deal with individual code units is such a lose that I just want to kick the people who afflicted the world with this idiocy. Aren’t you glad we don’t have to count code units in Perl? 😹

I see my stalker is back. Yawn!

Comment on Re^5: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration? by John M. Dlugosz (Monsignor) on May 12, 2011 at 12:57 UTC
The big question is: Where do you get a font with a "pouting cat face?" Never mind, I didn’t have symbola, installed on this computer. What are you using to type? I see you have U+2010 HYPHEN instead of the ASCII hyphin-minus character. I find wide strings to be a pain in C++/Windows. I suppose it was a good idea at the time of development of NT 3, since UTF-8 was a footnote and not the force for good as we understand it today. Still, at some point they could have made the "code page" for UTF-8 (which is defined) work correctly for the 8-bit char API functions. For all I know it should: it just wraps the native calls around a call to convert, and the convert function handles that one, right?	[reply]
Re^7: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration? by tchrist (Pilgrim) on May 12, 2011 at 14:37 UTC
The big question is: Where do you get a font with a "pouting cat face?" Never mind, I didn’t have symbola, installed on this computer. Yeah, Symbola is great, isn’t it? Perl 5.14 and Unicode 6.0 come to the aid of the e‐emotionally challenged: % unifmt -22 < emotica 😢 😔 😐 🌟 🐲 😽 👲 🗽 🐷 😚 😃 👿 💀 🌞 ⚇ 🙅 👶 👰 👵 🎭 ☺ 🐺 ☤ 👺 😱 👀 😌 😉 😳 👯 🌜 🐶 👨 😰 😞 👽 😂 😜 😪 😶 😁 ☃ ☻ 😾 🐸 👷 😡 ⚉ 😘 💩 👴 😣 🐻 🐮 👳 🐹 😻 😍 😏 🐴 🌝 😒 𐈿 🐪 🎅 🐾 ☹ 🐭 💃 👼 😥 😠 😩 ⚜ 😖 👦 😵 🐼 😝 🌛 👱 👩 🐯 😭 👮 💆 😆 😅 😤 😺 😼 🐰 👸 👾 😊 ⚛ 😫 😲 👻 😋 😈 👹 🐧 😇 😸 😎 😨 😓 😹 👧 😷 🌚 🎃 ⚚ 🐵 🙀 👅 🙆 🐱 😄 〠 Those aren’t just emotica: they’re emotiquísima! With 11 rows of 11 of them, may you never again lack the right emoticon. 😋 What are you using to type? I see you have U+2010 HYPHEN instead of the ASCII hyphin-minus character. Why, my fingers, of course! What are you using to type? 😜	[reply]
Re^8: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration? by John M. Dlugosz (Monsignor) on May 13, 2011 at 01:50 UTC
I mean, how are you entering the text? The standard monks entry form doesn't do any smart-quotes or typographical character substitution. If I touch-type I get the plain ASCII hyphen-minus. I have a supplementary keypad with more interesting characters, so I can type “don’t” but I'm finding it too much trouble compared to touch typing at full speed on the regular keyboard, so I probably won’t use it much for every old contraction. BTW, “‐” isn't in the Gentium Basic font, so Firefox finds one somewhere that don't match. I definitely use — and – all the time, but never found the need to use ‐ instead of - for good typesetting appearance. ☃	[reply]
Re^9: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration? by tchrist (Pilgrim) on May 13, 2011 at 02:40 UTC
Re^10: 'use' inside or outside of package declaration? by John M. Dlugosz (Monsignor) on May 13, 2011 at 03:09 UTC