Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2001
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 11:40:58AM -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 05:02:21PM +0000, Alan Burlison wrote: > > Nicholas Clark wrote: > > > > > Hangon. Is this perl6 now? Which list should it get to? > > > > > > I was meaning it more as an analogy, for stuff that shouldn't leak if > > > an eval dies. But it's not a great one, as you can eval inside an eval. > > > And only perl internals stuff. I was meaning that this was "implementation" > > > and perl scripts don't get to see it. > > > > Kinda both. Perl5 threads are irredeemably broken, and IMHO should be > > excised from the source as soon as possible - leaving them in only gives > > Otherwise a nice idea but the source has been rather irredeemably > ingrained in to the code. Undoing it would be more work than gain, > I think. Think of it as a limp with which we must live. But perhaps we should disable the ability to build perl with the limp, or at least display a large unavoidable health warning if the option is select, and rename the option irredeemably-broken-threads, and ... Tim [keen to remove thread stuff from the DBI].Thread Previous | Thread Next