[svn:perl6-synopsis] r14533 - doc/trunk/design/syn

Author: audreyt
Date: Wed Apr  2 09:13:06 2008
New Revision: 14533

Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod

Log:
* S09/Autovivification:

Change the wording "assignment implicitly binds a copy" to
"assignment is treated the same way as binding to a copy container",
because assignment and binding are two orthogonal concepts.

Reported by: John M. Dlugosz

Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
 ========================================
====================================
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod	(original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod	Wed Apr  2 09:13:06 2008
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
Date: 13 Sep 2004
Last Modified: 2 Apr 2008
Number: 9
-  Version: 25
+  Version: 26

=head1 Overview

@@ -1168,10 +1168,14 @@

Autovivification will only happen if the vivifiable path is bound to
a read-write container.  Value extraction (that is, binding to a readonly
-or copy container) does not autovivify.  (Note that assignment implicitly
-binds a copy, so it does not autovivify its right side.)  Any mention of
-an expression within a C<Capture> delays the autovivification decision
-to binding time.  (Binding to a "ref" parameter also defers the decision.)
+or copy container) does not autovivify.
+
+Note that assignment is treated the same way as binding to a copy container
,
+so it does not autovivify its right side either.
+
+Any mention of an expression within a C<Capture> delays the autovivificatio
n
+decision to binding time.  (Binding to a "ref" parameter also defers the
+decision.)

This is as opposed to PerlĀ_5, where autovivification could happen
unintentionally, even when the code looks like a non-destructive test: