Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2016
* Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com> [2016-05-27 13:39]: > > Otherwise you can turn off this warning and carry on.” > > Except the bug hasn't been fixed yet D’oh. > so it'd make more sense to actually fix it now, but you could change > it back to what it currently is after the following upgrade. Yeah, awkward. > That seems like more hassle on users than a typical deprecation > warning. Or at least a different sort of hassle. > > Is that really worth it for the sake of genuine uses of /$empty/, who > we don't know even exist at all? The reason for my discomfort is that this change in behaviour can easily lead to silent data corruption if the code was previously correct, and even in cases where the sudden difference in behaviour gets noticed, it may be very hard to track down what caused it. So I would not want that change made without giving sufficient notice that it’s coming. But you are right that it’s less than obvious how to do this coherently. Hmm. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>Thread Previous | Thread Next