develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from September 2013

[perl #120047] perl should enable "$_" for use before calling subs

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Linda Walsh via RT
Date:
September 30, 2013 03:38
Subject:
[perl #120047] perl should enable "$_" for use before calling subs
Message ID:
rt-3.6.HEAD-31239-1380512316-569.120047-15-0@perl.org
On Sun Sep 29 18:26:14 2013, LeonT wrote: 
> You're asking for other people's help,
---
I am?  I thought I was volunteering engineer design to fix problems -- I
don't have any insurmountable bugs on my plate right now.  I don't have
anything that needs fixing for my programs to work.

> That's> incredibly rude; I don't understand how you expect 
> people to help you this  way.
---
   The only time I need help is when perl is undebuggable except by
going into gdb.  I don't have enough knowledge about perl internals to
be very productive at that point.  

But lets take a look at the help I've been given.  I find a bug in
perl's I/O, and is it considered worth of getting a patch -- nope.  I
can upgrade[sic] to the latest unstable if I want it.

I ask where a patch is and am given a git version that pulls the entire
tree and I'm supposed to go looking for what was patched among 1000's of
lines of changes?  Vs. I use a generic name for a print.  All you have
to do is s/P/..insert your stuff here/.. it's not like you can run it
without putting it in a file == and 2 lines converts it all to
Datadumper output like Ricardo wanted.

So lets see, you see nothing wrong with me looking through 1000's of
changes for your change, but me having you add 2 lines of code is being
rude?  ... !??!??

Then you chime in with this gem:
 
> Worse yet, you come with this madness, or is it mockery, about including P
> in core. You're being unreasonable and ridiculous beyond words right now.
-----
    That you believe that to be the case is reflective of your really
screwed attitude regarding anything I might have touched.  That I might
be serious isn't something that even would enter into your mind.  That
someone might take that as being completely offensive is likely not even
something you would consider.  The fact that I have 1 routine that
replaces sprint, print, say, printf for 99% of my purposes irritates the
hell out of you doesn't it?  That you wouldn't want it in core because
it hilights design inconsistencies and problems in sprintf, printf, &
say, at least, and how the recommended data dumper is like using a Nuke
when you want to swat a bug.

If you want P to just be there, then you are asking for it to be in
CORE.  I'm just sayin'.




---
via perlbug:  queue: perl5 status: rejected
https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=120047

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