Vadim Belman
Vadim Belman
I'm still musing about it, but have some thoughts. 1. No version should be a warning. Any entry level tutorial in the future better begins with words like: _'Put `use...
I would stick to the state of affairs where in 6.e `$/` is not set. Because it brings in more problems than it solves. As far as I understand, most...
@lizmat make it a 6.e?
Spectest must not be ran against a single version. Moreover, _each_ test must have an explicit version. Not just `use v6` for which, I agree, there must be no place...
> * an actual compiler/runtime can implement and run different versions of the language What??? It does, mind me... For the rest of version-related stuff: that's why there are many...
> Not sure what this even means It was a mistype. "It does", not "I does". > what about those spectests that aren't meant to be run, given a newer...
I haven't read past " version mode". Give yourself an answer what that does mean. Then think of backward compatibility we provide – and you'd be surprised! I just have...
What constructiveness do you expect? If I tell you that code written 7 years ago with `use v6.c` we expect to be ran today with, perhaps, just a couple of...
> Thus a compiler would be free to provide a working version of `+` in v6.c mode, but even completely remove it from 6.d. Just about time! :) I've mentioned...
Can't get too deep into this, but so far I like the idea of fudging the most. So, tests which are not explicitly designed for a particular language version would...