Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2018
On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 12:21:12PM +0100, Sawyer X wrote: > > > On 01/24/2018 09:04 PM, slaven@rezic.de wrote: > > [...] > > > > - What does this change means in terms of usability of signatures? Users > > mixing signatures and prototypes must increase their perl prerequisite > > from 5.22 to 5.28, which may mean it could be less likely that > > signatures are used in the next time. Is this worth for this change? > > We don't like it, but the alternative is that you have partially broken > signatures. If we demand that signatures stay where they are, we are > demanding they stay broken when it comes to cooperating with other, > stable syntax - namely, subroutine attributes. This is literally broken > by design, in that sense. > > Honestly, I feel this is getting ridiculous. We cannot even change > experimental features that were *always* experimental because people > already started using it? That's the danger of keeping useful features experimental for a long time, specially, if they have been stable for a while. I'd very much like to see experimental features to be time boxed: after say, 2 releases, either the feature is considered stable, or it will be scratched (at least, as is). AbigailThread Previous | Thread Next