develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from November 2007

Re: Dropping 5.5 support from my modules.

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Gerard Goossen
Date:
November 29, 2007 04:52
Subject:
Re: Dropping 5.5 support from my modules.
Message ID:
20071129125735.GO5329@ostwald
A lot of things can be done without dropping support for VMS, or any
other platform and isn't specific to kurila. Part of the problem is
the way the core-tests are organised and the that they have grown. It
is very nice there are that many tests, but currently the platform
specific issues are scattered all over the place, often obscuring the
more the general tests. For example t/op/taint.t, its start with about
200 lines of platform specific tests/work-a-rounds etc. And only after
that there is a basic test whether a tainted variable is tainted. I am
sure this isn't much of a problem for people already working on the
core (they probably do the same as I do and ignore all the platform
specific code), but at first sight it is scary and makes things looks
much more difficult then they actually are.

I would propose to move the platform specific tests to
't/arch/<platform>.t' or 't/arch/<platform>/*.t'.

Doing this shouldn't be very difficult, but the problem with doing
this is of course that you need a a lot of different platforms that
everything works (normally I make some stupid typo, forgot to copy
some initialising or something similarly dumb), so doing it would be
best as some kind of coordinated effort.

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 09:20:32AM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 8:22 AM, Gerard Goossen wrote:
>
>> Because of the explicit distinction kurila makes between using
>> codepoints and using bytes¹, no special handling is required for EBCDIC
>> and all EBCDIC specific code is in utfebcdic.h.
>> That said, I don't have access to an EBCDIC machine and don't know how
>> to simulate it, and thus it probably doesn't really work, but it
>> doesn't make the rest of the code more complex².
>
> OK, but what about the VMS part?  That's really the key question: How much 
> simpler does the code get by removing VMS support?
>
> Yes, I understand it's academic at this point.
>
> xoxo,
> Andy
>
>
> --
> Andy Lester => andy@petdance.com => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
>
>
>
>

-- 
Gerard Goossen
TTY Internet Solutions


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About