Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2017
On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Sawyer X <xsawyerx@gmail.com> wrote: > > One of the points I was subtly trying to imply is that I think that in > some cases it might be an unfair burden to put on you or other module > authors. > > If your code needs more than what the language has to you without having > to bend over backward to make it work (and to provide compatibility when > it inevitably breaks), we should revisit it. One option is to give up > and say "We can't provide this cleanly. Implement it however you want at > your peril." We can say this, but it feels like the last resort, merely > admitting we can't or uninterested in offering what you need. Another > option is to add the APIs you need cleanly. The problem with this is > that we might corner ourselves having to maintain support for something > that might be in the way of something in the future. The third option is > also raised here, which is to core some of it - or perhaps all of it. > Another possibility would be to promulgate a strong recommendation that when extensions extend core, they should do so by implementing a maintainable proposed draft API in core and independent code that uses said API. Paul has done exactly that, submitting his two hooks for inclusion in core. -- “no man should be compelled to do what the laws do not require; nor to refrain from acts which the laws permit.” Calder v. Bull (U.S. 1798)Thread Previous | Thread Next