Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2015
On Sun May 19 17:35:58 2013, jkeenan wrote: > On Fri Mar 01 08:39:28 2013, davem wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 09:53:03PM -0500, Ricardo Signes wrote: > > > * demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com> [2013-02-24T00:53:55] > > > > Good catch. I actually wonder at the wisdom of this at all. Having > > the > > > > warnings be on a different channel than the data means you dont > > know > > > > which item being benchmarked is responsible for the warning as the > > two > > > > handles can get out of sync due to buffering. > > > > > > I think if that's the case, we might want to improve the warning > > message to > > > make it clearer, rather than put the warnings on the standard output > > stream. > > > > > > I also wonder whether some of the tests that are emitting these > > warnings are > > > emitting them with good reason. That is: are they actually testing > > timings > > > badly? I have not yet investigated. > > > > > > I've reverted the change for now with commit > > a2656c4ab81b216a427d1e0db6a3aa25b4350ba8. > > > > Presumably we can re-address this issue post-5.18. > > > > Now that we're post-5.18.0, can someone sum up where we stand with the > issues discussed in this ticket? > > If the issues are unresolved, it would be good to know whether we should > continue discussing them in this ticket, versus opening up a new ticket > with a clean statement of the problems. > > Thank you very much. > Jim Keenan There has been no further substantive discussion in this RT in the past 21 months. Any remaining concerns would be better handled in a fresh ticket. Marking ticket resolved. Thank you very much. -- James E Keenan (jkeenan@cpan.org) --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=116831Thread Previous | Thread Next