Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2010
On 28 November 2010 22:16, David Golden <xdaveg@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 4:36 AM, demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think you missed the point. >> >> [Awesome comments omitted for brevity] >> >> I think the community will contibue to be particularly sensitive to >> back-compat issues, it is in in our blood and heritage. Yet at the >> same time, the only truely stable language is a dead one. And we arent >> in the programming-language mortuary business here on this list. > > +1 > > I think Yves' comments were passionate, direct and on the mark. Perl > 5 will change and that will occasionally break things in the name of > progress. Hopefully, it will be rare, but we should never think that > it won't happen. > > I do believe that Yves' was speaking in general, and nothing personal > was directed towards Steffen, whose well-intentioned thoughts on what > turns out to have been a 16-year old deprecation have led to a thread > rather larger than the specific issue at hand. This is correct. My rant was not *at* Steffen, but in response to the general subject. I think were it not for the back-compat-police coming out of the woodwork so often we would have more contributors. I can say for sure that the prospect that almost any change, even bug fixes for obviously broken behaviour, will bring out the bike-shed mob and the back-compat-police does not incline me to allocate my extra time to perl. Somehow back in the day when I was doing it more or less full time it didn't bother me so much, but after a long day at work... cheers, Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next