develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from February 2020

Thread Next
From:
Ricardo Signes
Date:
February 10, 2020 13:03
Subject:

Message ID:
40f4cb9f-5698-42fa-95ed-83186a4a29b1@www.fastmail.com
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, at 1:37 AM, demerphq wrote:
> I personally find this absurd. In one case we are arguing that making a regexp construct that can infinite loop die cannot be backported because it introduces a new fatal exception. There is some suggestion that making it generate a different, existing error message, "saves the backport". I find this absurd too. Why should a less useful message be ok, but a more informative one not be?

You are omitting an important part of my objection:

It introduces a new *compile time *exception that would affect programs not affected by the existing *runtime* exception.

This isn't swapping in a better error message. This is making more programs die, including ones that currently run without error.

-- 
rjbs
Thread Next


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