Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2012
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 3:22 AM, David Golden <xdaveg@gmail.com> wrote: > There is so much in POSIX.pm that doesn't work portably or that the > docs say shouldn't actually be used, that I don't see any reason to > deprecate this particular piece. If it's really dangerous, the doc > warning could be strengthened, possibly by referring them to perlipc > which discusses the use of safe signals (and potential risks of unsafe > signals). My real problem with it is that I have no idea why anyone would want to use this. There's absolutely nothing you can't do without it. It's a poorly written wrapper class around previously existing POSIX functionality. > Put differently, does the ability of a user to enable unsafe signals > actually interfere with something else that needs doing/fixing? (And > if so, what about PERL_SIGNALS?) Or is the core of your objection a > stylistic one? I completely respect a stylistic objection (I might > even agree with it), but don't think that clears the bar for > deprecation, given the options we give people for shooting themselves > in the foot already. Right now it doesn't even enable people to shoot themselves in the foot, since it's not documented how to do that! LeonThread Previous | Thread Next