Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2015
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Eric Brine <ikegami@adaelis.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Paul Johnson <paul@pjcj.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:20:58AM -0400, Eric Brine wrote:
>>
>> > For warnings, that's a backwards compatible change I oppose. I was
>> > promised
>> > that `use warnings;` would enable all warnings, and I've been
>> > recommending
>> > its usage on that basis for a decade.
>>
>> I still don't understand this argument. What is the practical
>> difference to you between "use warnings" not enabling a new warning by
>> default and the new warning never having been added?
>
>
> What's the point of debating this hypothetical situation that will never
> occur?
It would occur if we changed the API as Ricardo is suggesting.
> There are plenty of good reasons to add warnings, and I included
> instructions to get them. The proposed change would change my instructions,
> breaking all of my code. Every file would need to be changed.
>
> Furthermore, I've been telling these instructions to people weekly for a
> decade. All of their code would need to be changed too.
I think we're at risk of starting to talk in circles about this again.
We've already had two threads with a cumulative reply count of around
100 discussing the pros & cons of changing this API:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2014/06/msg217115.html
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2014/12/msg224127.html
I'm all for us continuing where we left off, but let's not start again
from scratch. You brought up this same point in the last discussion,
which spawned dozens of replies starting with:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2014/06/msg217150.html
But as far as I can tell you didn't engage in the subsequent
discussion. I made an attempt to summarize some of the different pros
& cons of what we could do here in a subsequent thread:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2014/12/msg224147.html
What do you think about the different options presented there, or do
you have some of your own which you'd like to suggest? With the
current warning interface we can't freely add "advisory" warnings to
the core, what API do you suggest to allow us to do so?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next