Re: OP_SIGNATURE

>> OP_SIGNATURE *is* aimed at the "semantic activity of extracting> arguments", and is not tied to one particular syntax. Part of the proof of> that is that it can be used to implement my(...) = @_ syntax in addition> to handling the current signature syntax. It can be used anywhere> where the contents of @_ need to be assigned to a list of my() variables> (modulo the optimisation which requires fresh lexicals) with optional arg> count error checking and default value assignment.

By the way, do you have an idea about why do you get a performance gain 
with OP_SIGNATURE as compared to the previous padrange optimization 
which, if I remember correctly, can already handle "my (...) = @_" in 
one op? (disclaimer: I'm neither for or against the proposal. I'm just 
curious about what could cause such a dramatic improvement when padrange 
seems at first glance conceptually much simpler).


Vincent