Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2011
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Leon Timmermans <fawaka@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Father Chrysostomos <sprout@cpan.org> wrote: >> On the other hand it might complicate things in future releases when >> we cannot decide whether a new feature is actually the disabling >> of a bug (e.g., feature "unicode_strings" is actually no legacy >> "unicode_bug"). > > I'd say changing/adding syntax is adding a new feature, and changing > semantics is probably a bugfix. What is removing stuff? E.g. ?PATTERN? feature "no_question_pattern"? There is something conceptually nice thinking about "legacy" things rather than features which disable things. I wonder if it's worth considering compilation effects separate from runtime effects (even if the runtime effect gets defined at compilation time). E.g. unicode_strings won't cause old code to fail to compile, but it will cause a behavior change. Are we trying to protect legacy code against being considered illegal in a future compiler or from behaving differently? Or both? -- DavidThread Previous | Thread Next