Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2013
On 13 June 2013 02:01, Leon Timmermans <fawaka@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Tony Cook <tony@develop-help.com> wrote: >> Just adding to the exception list is similar to making a change that >> breaks perl and then changing the tests that broke into TODO tests. > > That's the part that doesn't make sense to me. Is it really more work > to fix a newly introduced verbatim line than it is to add it to the > list of exceptions? When the verbatim line is output from perl, then yes, it is. I have had these tests go off when I am documenting what Perl outputs. It outputs a string longer than 80 characters, but I cant just paste it into a doc because of these tests. And I dont think the docs should contain munge perl output. If the output is going to be munged it should be munged by the pod processor. That is my big objection here. We are forcing people to change the *input* to a *program* so that other people can view that input in a text editor at their preferred screen dimensions. I think that is wrong. The input should be such that if I have a wide enough screen I see the *unmunged* data, and the program should handle munging it for their screen size. In otherwords we are doing it backwards and we are doing it unperlishly. Computers and Perl especially is supposed to make mundane tasks go away, not force new ones on us. We are hackers, we should fixing the *display* program, and not the *input* it receives. Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next