develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from September 2011

Re: Removing =?UTF-8?B?cGVybOKAmXMgRUJDRElDIHN1cHBvcnQgY291bGQgYg==?==?UTF-8?B?ZSBwcm9maXRhYmxlIHRvIHovT1MgdXNlcnMgW3dhczogU3BlYWsgdXAgbm93IGE=?==?UTF-8?B?Ym91dCB5b3VyIHVzZSBvZiBFQkNESUNd?=

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Mark Mielke
Date:
September 26, 2011 23:34
Subject:
Re: Removing =?UTF-8?B?cGVybOKAmXMgRUJDRElDIHN1cHBvcnQgY291bGQgYg==?==?UTF-8?B?ZSBwcm9maXRhYmxlIHRvIHovT1MgdXNlcnMgW3dhczogU3BlYWsgdXAgbm93IGE=?==?UTF-8?B?Ym91dCB5b3VyIHVzZSBvZiBFQkNESUNd?=
Message ID:
4E816E82.9090606@mark.mielke.cc
+1 for dropping support for EBCDIC and allowing the code to officially 
die over time. I wouldn't bother with a specific search and destroy 
mission - but any changes to code that has #ifdef EBCDIC that begins to 
remove the chunks as they get changed and cannot be properly tested 
should be fair game.

If there was a champion - somebody who could keep all other developers 
aware of EBCDIC concerns and both detect and recommend solutions to 
problems - the question wouldn't need to be asked.

If IBM wants to support it, they can provide resources to keep it up to 
date. If they won't, then they have placed their vote with their wallet. 
IBM is a business. There is no need for the perl5-porters to subsidize 
IBM's business. This isn't a government subsidy.

As a selfish user of Perl, I'd rather resources were spent on the 
aspects that will benefit the majority of the users - specifically 
including me. I do not want the resources split on some obscure 
character set.

Just thought it needed to be said...

Note that I'm leaving room for a champion or IBM to step up. But unless 
this happens, I think the proper direction to take is clear.

-- 
Mark Mielke<mark@mielke.cc>


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About