Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2016
Re: Indented here docs?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Sawyer X
Date:
July 4, 2016 21:17
Subject:
Re: Indented here docs?
Message ID:
577AD279.30904@gmail.com
On 07/03/2016 01:12 AM, Father Chrysostomos wrote:
> Sawyer X wrote:
>> Perhaps we should consider a change to the policy
>> Thoughts?
> It should not be necessary. We are not automatons who cannot make
> exceptions here and there. :-)
Those two sentences pointed at different intentions in my head. Are you
saying you aren't against making an exception for this or you still
suggest abiding by the policy? Not nitpicking, I just want to make sure
I understand. :)
> Also, there is something related that I have been thinking about
> lately. Once a feature is no longer experimental in blead, there is
> no reason for people not to go ahead and use it in earlier versions
> where it is officially experimental (unless we think it may revert to
> experimental status in blead, which seems unlikely to me), as long as
> we document just how far back the feature is stable, both in terms of
> behaviour and in terms of not crashing. (E.g., we should document
> that lexical subs are likely to crash before 5.22.)
>
> This seems obvious to me, but there are those who are afraid of the
> experimental label and will stay away from it. How do we communi-
> cate that a feature accepted in, say, 5.26 is usable in 5.22? Do
> we need to?
If we abide by the policy, this means that you only receive one version
in which we *know* it works (since it requires to be unchanged
behaviorally for a entire release before we take it off "experimental"
label). So whatever version in which it fully became "stable", it can
only be one release of unchanged behavior. Yes?
The only situation in which it might be more relevant is if we have any
experimental feature that isn't set to stable for more than one version.
We have a few, but it's relatively rare nowadays, no?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next