Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2000
David Grove <pete@petes-place.com> writes: >I'm not expecting perfection in the latest, greatest release of Perl, but I >do think that the subcommunities that we represent would be better served by >releasing after a real _public_ beta period, longer than say a month, with >realistic time given to bring some of the modules up to date... at the very >least the most important ones on a given platform, like LibWin32 and Tk. Okay - you mentioned Tk twice now. What exactly is your gripe about Tk and perl5.6.0 ? The only issue that I am aware of with Tk and perl5.6.0 is that some long deprecated coding practices (e.g. not declaring the widgets you use) lead to peculiar error messages due to the ->isa bug. Tk800.020 fixes that. (It is worth noting that the 'use base'/->isa bug is a side effect of a patch contributed to the mailing list and not anything fundamental to the newness of 5.6.0 - just lack of test suite coverage and patch author's lack of knowledge of the side effects.) > >I wouldn't say lazy, really, just overworked, tired and with more joy >hacking and coding than maintaining; >especially maintaining something when >the rug is pulled out from under you. No rug was pulled from Tk - Tk is excessively familiar with perl's guts and despite that extemely minimal changes were required. >I'm wondering whether the term >"backwards compatibility" has escaped us. It is my watchword. -- Nick Ing-SimmonsThread Previous | Thread Next