Adjust pp_ctl.c for use vX statements

[atoomic]

t/comp/use.t and pp_ctl.c needs to be adjusted to respect these rules

Rules

my @bad = qw{
    use v8; # not sure - need decision
    use v6;
    use v6.1;
    use v6.0.1;
    use 6.001;
    # same with 'no' would be a bonus

    use v7.*; # index('v7.')
    use 7*; # index('7')

    use 5.10; => 5.100
    use 5.6;  => 5.600

    no v5;
    

};

my @good = qw{
    
    use v7;
    no v7;

    use v5;
    use v5.10;
    use 5.010;
};

Concept

	if (*ptr == '7' ) {
    	...
	}

	if (*ptr == 'v') ++ptr ;
	switch ( *ptr  ) {
		case '5':
			go back to 5 logic using vcmp but v5.32.255.255
		break;
		case '6':
			Sorry Perl 6 is not available in Perl 7
		break;

		case '7':
			/* warning use 7* is not supported 
		break;
		default: /* 8 is there not implemented */
			"Unknown behavior for use X"
	}

[jkeenan]

Does this issue have to be resolved before we merge alpha-dev-01-bump-version branch into alpha branch?

Logistically, is it necessarily part of satisfying Objective 1? Or can it be done at a later point in the process (and if so, which objective)?

Thank you very much.
jimk

[atoomic]

IMO it's a new objective 1.1 but @toddr would prefer it sooner than later to perform some testing

[jkeenan]

I'd like to reserve the "objective" label for those tickets that actually describe one of the (more or less) agreed-upon objectives.

I think for this ticket we should create a new label. Something along the lines of:

design-decision-needed

... because that's what comes first

[jkeenan]

IMO it's a new objective 1.1 but @toddr would prefer it sooner than later to perform some testing

Here's my thinking.

On the one hand, it doesn't seem like it's needed either (a) to begin "outside" testing of what we've got so far (see email); or (b) what we need to satisfy Objective 1 and get to tag alpha-01 (and then commence work on Objective 2).

On the other hand, it's a design decision in which the Perl Steering Committee presumably needs to be consulted.

With the exception of Objective 16, all the objectives we've created so far have been things on which the Perl Steering Committee has made a decision. Not a written-in-stone decision, to be sure, but a decision nonetheless. As much as possible, I'd like to create objectives only for things on which the PSC has given a go-ahead.

I recommend that we tag c34cde5 as alpha-01-MC-0 and commence outside testing.

@toddr can then create a branch and start working up the various alternatives suggested in the OP for this ticket. Then, when the PSC makes its decision, we can merge that into whatever is the working branch at that moment. In other words, when the decision lands, the code is fee to land -- but we don't deem any objective unmet for lack of that decision/code in the meantime.

How does that sound?

Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan

[atoomic]

commit aa0e056 provides a start of the changes required to meet this sub-objective

I agree with tagging once merged