Perl 6 / recent changes to Rakudo

http://stevemynott.blogspot.com/2015/05/announce-rakudo-perl-6-compiler.html

Implemented CLIENT:: (nearest CALLER:: from different package)

Someone needed this for something and made a strong enough case to get it implemented. I would like to hear that story because this sounds crazy.

Test.pm functions are now kebab-cased (e.g. throws_like -> throws-like)

Are we Lisp yet?

kebab-cased

What? Is that really the name for the superior variable naming scheme? I just call it "like you do it in Lisp".

>>2
MINUS-CASED

>>2
Oh, like how people say "Python style" when referring to literally any feature they think they understand. I hear you.

high dralics

http://ai.neocities.org/AiSteps.html

cannot wait for Perl 6.

>>6
You can and you will.

>>2
god i though you were joking, "kebab-cased" is actually a thing

>>4
What do you call it then?

GNU/Scheme-case

polecat-cased.

it's not a casing style though it's a spacing style

hyphenated

dehydrated

>>6
You don't have to wait. It's in great shape right now.

>>9
Well, if you want to keep with the precedent Pythonistas set, we could call it Perl-cased. Remember, you must never name the feature after language it was taken from.

Or we could call it kebab-cased. I'm fine with that, and there is precedent for that kind of naming. I would be fine with lisp-cased, but that evokes the notion of case-insensitivity as much as anything else.

>>12
What the fuck are you... oh I get it. You mean delimiting (or tokenizing) style. Yes, Perl 6 can do this without conflicts because of sigils and the TTIAR rule. Lisp can do it for other syntax reasons. Most languages would have to treat this as a spacing style. To the programmer it fits into to the idea of word-delimiting within a token.

I renew my support for “kebab-case”—remember snake_case isn't really about casing except when compared to ShitCase and hungarianShitCase.

It probably doesn't matter what it gets called. You don't need a name for it in Lisp (>>2 isn't wrong to call it that, despite my ribbing.) You do in Perl 6 because there are different conventions for different things.

Can't wait for the bloat.

>>15
It's actually FLOW-MATIC-CASED.
App apes don't understand history.

Perl 6 is good for domain-specific solutions, but it doesn't adequately address the issue of multiple inheritance out of the box.

>>18
Why is that a problem? Perl is good for manipulating strings and that's the context where I use Perl. If I want OO style inheritence, I'll use either Java or CPP.

>>18

the issue of multiple inheritance

Multiple inheritance is an issue itself. Actually, OOP is a huge issue made into a BEST PRACTICE.

>>18
u wot m8? Check out perl 6's OOP model. It's very feature rich, besides all the bloat in it.

>>19-21
YHBT http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1786

I can't fucking believe /prog/

>>22
Sorry for not knowing beforehand about your epic pop culture reference, /b/ro!

>>20
Communists hate inheritance because everything belongs to the state.

>>24
and the state belongs to the communists.

>>24
That's what happens in a classless society!

>>24-26
Functional programming continues to reign supreme: No classes and no state.