develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from March 2021

Re: on changing perl's behavior

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Christian Walde
Date:
March 27, 2021 22:03
Subject:
Re: on changing perl's behavior
Message ID:
CAMX0BdngMrnQnoYcMxmu=tU1GNCNK88UNVciV8RgFt0AHuW3aA@mail.gmail.com
On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 at 21:49, Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote:
>
> So I think, after saying all this, the first big question is:  Is there a general agreement that there are kinds of changes we've made (or will make) to the language that we can ease into making the default, through some multi-step process?

I don't think that question is very worthwhile. We obviously can. We
have done so. The question is: Should we?

And specifically: Should we break people's stuff because we disagree
with how they use Perl?

As i told you in the private convo:

The postfix-deref defaulting isn't a huge issue. I don't think i said
clearly that this is primarily because introducing it broke nothing
that reasonably affected anyone.

However as i also told you: It IS AN ISSUE. If it had not happened and
postfix-deref were version-gated we could have Perl::Critic policies
that verify people are applying it correctly. Now we can't. It broke
something.

And to lead back to the 7.0 plan:

Making strict default isn't something that breaks nothing that
reasonably affects anyone.

Making strict default is VERY EXPLICITLY intended to break people's
stuff and force them into action. And worse, you institute a policy of
introducing changes without versioning on major versions. This is a
promise that you'll break stuff that can NEVER BE FIXED. You break
IDEs, syntax highlighters, static analysers of all kinds by creating a
new untagged dialect with EVERY FUCKING MAJOR RELEASE if you follow
the plan you laid out.

If you want to do it the very first thing you MUST ADMIT is that
you're breaking something, whose stuff you're breaking and how you're
hurting them and how they're likely to react and whether that reaction
is worth it.

Seriously, this is actually making me incredibly angry at this point.
I STILL, despite having asked REPEATEDLY, don't know: Do y'all even
know how much you're breaking and if you don't care, or do you not
even know?

Is it so much to ask for that being acknowledged clearly and without
any sort of indirection or flowery language or whatever the fuck?

Can't y'all just say "Actually i don't think it breaks XYZ."
or "It breaks XYZ and this is good."?

It's been almost a year.

I'm utterly and completely sick of asking and never getting replies or
getting stuff in return that just leads multiple layers of indirection
astray.

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