develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from June 2018

Re: [perl #132142] Bleadperl v5.27.3-34-gf6107ca24b breaksMLEHMANN/AnyEvent-HTTP-2.23.tar.gz

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Andreas Koenig
Date:
June 24, 2018 09:34
Subject:
Re: [perl #132142] Bleadperl v5.27.3-34-gf6107ca24b breaksMLEHMANN/AnyEvent-HTTP-2.23.tar.gz
Message ID:
13109_1529832896_5B2F65BC_13109_141_1_87r2kwzfx5.fsf@k85.linux.bogus
>>>>> On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 14:00:03 -0700, "Dave Mitchell via RT" <perlbug-followup@perl.org> said:

  > On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 08:52:25PM +0200, Andreas Koenig wrote:
 >> After some digging I finally found the original tickets that started
 >> this story. Enjoy the timeline below that now provides the for so long
 >> missing piece. It would be cool if it could help this issue receive the
 >> appropriate amount of fairness.

  > I am genuinely puzzled by your email. In what way do you feel that this
  > issue is currently not receiving "the appropriate amount of fairness",
  > and in what way do you feel that the provided links help in improving
  > fairness?

Thanks for asking. I would suggest re-reading the one sentence:

  : It would be cool if I could say: sort @array; or @array = sort_in_place
  : @array; and get an inplace sort

Ask yourself what in-place-sort means and answer the following
questions:

- does an in-place-sort change any element within the array?
- is an in-place-sort conceptually an assignment?
- did the as per 2004-02-20 committed solution provide an in-place-sort
  disguised as an assignment?
- was it clever to provide an in-place-sort disguised as an assignement?

My tentative answers:

- no
- no
- yes
- probably not

  > In particular, reading through the 2004 ticket in its entirety only
  > confirms in my mind that the work I did on in-place sort back then was
  > intended as an internal optimisation to save memory memory and CPU, and I
  > am still of the opinion that if, back in 2004 someone had pointed out that
  > my optimisation failed to strengthen weak refs, then I would have regarded
  > it as a bug and fixed it.

There is no doubt that your intentions back then and today are
consistent. But a more complete view on the whole matter should have
revealed by now that there are at least two ways to read and argue the
story.

I sincerely believe it cannot be too hard for an average bystander of
good will to argue both ways.

-- 
andreas

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About