develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from September 2014

Re: Versioned 'strict'

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Kent Fredric
Date:
September 12, 2014 07:03
Subject:
Re: Versioned 'strict'
Message ID:
CAATnKFBS86giOy-UwnfmVaRP-39VW9AQWwRO3JGPy5gyN8rcvg@mail.gmail.com
On 12 September 2014 18:04, Rafael Garcia-Suarez <rgs@consttype.org> wrote:

> If I remember correctly, this idea was shot down forever for
> backwards-compatibility
> reasons: "use strict" with a new flag is a compile-time error
> currently, so that would
> require to specify a minimum version anyway.
>

^ Indeed.

http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2014/06/msg217115.html
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.perl.perl5.porters/139356/focus=139498

This is really my objection too, which seems unsolvable without cpanization.

I mused over creating say,   warnings::versioned as a CPAN module which
would simply do as much of the right thing on your perl of choice.

But I don't really want to create yet-another-warnings-pragma.

So unless somebody can find a way to make warnings.pm/strict.pm exist on
CPAN in such a way these features* can be backported to 5.8, I see the
":5.20" grade syntax as being a non-player.

*I'm not saying the strictures and the warnings themselves have to be
backported, just the ability for those parameters to do *anything* other
than fatalize, and instead, deliver a subset of the set that is available,
would be desirable.

Also: Side note: This is a good example of where a canonicalisation of a
discussion would be highly useful. Finding the old thread was a bit
challenging, seeing aggregate conclusion of that discussion seems even
harder.

And it would be nice to not have to re-hash that entire discussion with a
slightly different prefix.

-- 
Kent

*KENTNL* - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL

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