Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2017
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 19:53:42 -0700, public@khwilliamson.com wrote: > I have never liked upgrade and downgrade. When you upgrade something > you are supposed to get something better, like more legroom. Well, er, that is exactly what you get. You can stretch your legs beyond CLV.* > I have > never seen why a PV is better than a number, or a UTF-8 string better > than a non-one (it's far slower, for example, I think that is one of the best arguments in favour of ‘upgrade’. It is just like upgrading most commercial software! > which is a downgrade in my > estimation). The use of upgrade and downgrade is jargon based on the > attitudes of the implementers, which should be avoided. Maybe it's too > baked in to change, but I regret that it's there. UTF-8 itself is an > implementation detail that should never have been exposed to the > outside, but 'use utf8' pretty much does that. * That is a Roman numeral. -- Father Chrysostomos --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=131685Thread Previous | Thread Next