Skip to content
Browse files

Add a place for review-notes and discussion about the text.

  • Loading branch information...
1 parent 6e6ccf8 commit 9a5a82a0aa94ebd641d5b34a0b0f28570200c32d @pmichaud pmichaud committed
Showing with 55 additions and 0 deletions.
  1. +55 −0 docs/review-notes.txt
55 docs/review-notes.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+Pm-1: (basics) The first example uses C<.split> (e.g. to get the list
+ of names), but in Perl 6 the canonical way to grab a list
+ of words is via C<.comb>. Should we switch?
+Pm-2: (basics) Footnote 1 -- I'd reword as "Unlike in Perl 5, in Perl 6
+ the sigil does not change when accessing an array or hash
+ using C<[ ]> or C<{ }>. This is called I<sigil invariance>."
+Pm-3: (basics) I know it's a bit early to talk about Junctions, but
+ for the answer to problem #2 it might be better to say
+ unless all($p1, $p2) ~~ @names { ... }
+Pm-4: (operators) The &infix:<,> operator doesn't construct a C<List>,
+ and C<List>s are no longer immutable.
+Pm-5: (operators, footnote #3) "When the right-hand side appears
+ to be a list or array..." actually gets the test backwards.
+ If the right-hand side is clearly a scalar, it's a tight item assignment,
+ otherwise it defaults to a loose-precedence list assignment.
+Pm-6: (operators, "Comparisons and Smart Matching") The first paragraph
+ is completely wrong -- C<===> tests for value equivalents, not
+ object identity.
+Pm-7: (operators, "Three-way Comparison") Actually, the three-way
+ comparisons return C<Order::Increase>, C<Order::Same>, and
+ C<Order::Decrease>, not integers. (And while we're at it,
+ C<.sort> tests for greater than, less than, and equal to 0, not
+ for -1 and +1.)
+Pm-8: (subroutines) The code for C<@awesome-dance> uses the
+ C<< <...> >> quoting operator but it hasn't been introduced
+ yet in the text.
+Pm-9: (subroutines, "Alternative Named Argument Syntaxes")
+ Actually, it's not the case that all Pairs act as named
+ arguments. We ought to clean this up. We should also
+ probably make explicit the terms "colonpair" and "autoquoted
+ pair".
+Pm-10: (subroutines, pairs) "You can use any of these forms
+ in any context where you can use a Pair object." Again this
+ is horribly imprecise and likely to confuse people.
+Pm-11: (subroutines, "return") The code here uses a statement
+ modifier when we haven't introduced them yet.
+Pm-12: More generally, it seems like we ought to have a chapter on
+ statements before diving into subroutines.
+Pm-13: (subroutines, "Capture in Signatures") uses the :(...)
+ syntax before it's been introduced.

0 comments on commit 9a5a82a

Please sign in to comment.
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.