Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2001
Nicholas Clark wrote: > Alan has expressed his feelings on C++, Perl's "API" and the implementation > of threads most everywhere. Dan doesn't like C, and I'm starting to agree. > Jarkko and I both despise the standards committee for long long in C99 > (but I think I start to understand how a standards committee works, and hence > can see why it happens) > Is there any language we actually all like? :-) Well, uh, duh, can't think of one offhand... ;-) My views on C++ are the result of having to spend 8 hours a day for 6 months taking leaks, heap corruptions, compiler-specific behaviour dependencies and other mountains of cr*p out of a monstrous C++ app. Back in the cfront days I used to be a C++ evangelist - till I found the hard way what a crock it is. Every since it appeared Stroustroup and later the ANSI committee have been trying to fix it, and they still haven't managed it. Talk about putting warts on top of pustules on top of boils... As for threads, I think they are wonderful. Except for the p5 misimplementation that is... > So we've traded the insecurity of csh globbing for tread non-safety > of readdir calls in File::Glob? > [I don't have a problem with this - I think it's the right choice. But I > like to know what assumptions are underlying things] > > Is it worth adding a question to Configure, default to [n], to ask if > the gethostent() is thread safe? > And if not, conditionally protect all the pp ops with a mutex if threading > is compiled in? > > Or are there more important things to put effort into? > [like doing the whole thing properly for perl6] You are right, it is a hairball. Looks like configure just got even more complicated... Alan BurlisonThread Previous | Thread Next