Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2000
"Mark Mielke" <markm@nortelnetworks.com> writes:
> > Nope. It's still there, but like your doddering old auntie,
> > who has a strange accent and still talks about the Ægypians.
> > There are a few places it doesn't work, but those are the new places.
> > Old code continues to function.
>
> I spit on such code. It is disgusting.
Maybe, but without it some older code would stop functioning.
Backwards compatibility -- regardless of why somehting was implemented
the way it once was -- is important. Some code still in use and in
distribution still use the $foo'bar notation -- majordomo, for
instance, I believe.
> > >It was _wrong_. It was a decision made on cuteness,
> > You're mistaken. It was a decision made on precedent; see Ada.
>
> Oh? And the choice to use Ada syntax was which? And the choice of
> Ada to use that syntax was from where exactly?
Again, arguing that a choice made in the past was bad really doesn't
achieve much. Even if it was made on cuteness the important point is
that it was made at all. If you want to eliminate backwards
compatibility, just say so; otherwise I don't see much point in
arguing whether a rather old decision was worthwhile or not.
Chip
--
Chip Turner chip@ZFx.com
Programmer, ZFx, Inc. www.zfx.com
PGP key available at wwwkeys.us.pgp.net
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next