While convenience in porting code might be a factor to take
into consideration, I have to agree that I do not think it
a strong enough reason to change the current syntax of Perl.
Particularly, I have trouble with the attempt to justify such
a change so that Perl will be more compatible with products
from a company that is trying to
destroy Perl.
It is true that implementing dot notation will also make
Perl more compatible with other languages, but when one is
porting code, there are always things that need to be changed.
If we make Perl so much like other languages that it becomes
difficult to distinguish them, then what is the argument for
having different languages anyway?
Another consideration is that this will make backwards
compatibility with earlier perls troublesome. I personally
dislike anything that prevents backwards compatibility. When
a change becomes necessary that creates problems with backwards
compatibility, it is my opinion that the changes necessary
should be relatively trivial. The concatenation operator is
not, IMO, such a trivial change.
I say, let's keep Perl the unique language that it is. Particularly
if, in doing so, we can avoid the appearance of pandering to
those who would destroy it.
Update: per
jepri's remarks - I am glad that
there will be a compat mechanism; that certainly resolves
most of my concerns about it. And, I have to agree that
making Perl more accessible to the greater programming
community is a good thing ... still ...
($perl{characteristics} eq 'unique') ? $perl{charm}++ : $perl{charm}+=
+0;
Still IMO, of course.