Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2016
On Thu May 12 07:48:09 2016, lists.perl.perl5-porters@csjewell.fastmail.us wrote: > On Wed, May 11, 2016, at 13:08, Ricardo SIGNES via RT wrote: > > What, if anything, is preventing this from leaving experimental status? > > > > (I've been using these more lately, and I am still happy.) > > Maybe I can throw some questions out from this issue. > > "Do they deparse?" is the main question I'm seeing. They do deparse, as of 5.22, except for the bizarre edge cases in lexsub.t. I don’t think the remaining cases need to block it. > Others questions I see are that there are problems with the callchecker > related to these subs (which may already be solved), and setting Reading, not setting. > a > prototype at runtime. Those are solved. The prototype-reading problem was a misunderstanding. > Which, if any, of these do we want to make official requirements to make > this unexperimental? Or do we just say 'We've had enough time, Mikey > likes it, so it's unexperimental now." Ticket #123367, as I said before. Other than that, I think the implementation is stable enough. A year ago I would certainly not have thought so. -- Father Chrysostomos --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=120085Thread Previous | Thread Next