Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2016
The downside to not documenting them in that there is no explanation as to why they are bad to use. I myself used Internals::SvREFCNT(), I found some documentation that said Internals:: should not be used, but no real reason why except that it may change. I then noticed that Internals::SvREFCNT() was used in places that made it VERY unlikely it would ever be removed/renamed. So I just went ahead and used it, and did so until others eventually found out and convinced me to stop. I don't remember the reasons I was given that convinced me to stop using it. I wish I did so that I could propose we add them as part of the documentation. This is precisely why the namespace should be documented, more opportunities for warnings. An opportunity to provide reasons to avoid using them as well. -Chad On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 2:34 AM, Sawyer X <xsawyerx@gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/06/2016 03:39 PM, Tony Cook wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 06, 2016 at 09:05:23AM -0400, James E Keenan wrote: > >> What is Internals? > > Internals is deliberately undocumented, unsupported. > > Not documenting as a form of keeping possible users away feels like > security by obscurity. Documentation should not imply support. We can > document it clearly for other core developers and note *very* clearly > that it is unsupported. >Thread Previous | Thread Next