Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2017
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Zefram <zefram@fysh.org> wrote: > They'd want a deprecation to give them notice to rewrite their code > for portability across the smartmatch change. But why would they want their code to break? Why would they want to have to rewrite? > They'd want the process > of changing smartmatch to move forward so that they can get a language > feature that's coherent and usable To many people it's already quite usable if you limit yourself to the dumb parts. > which p5p is willing to maintain. That's about p5p, not about our users. LeonThread Previous | Thread Next