Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • A lot of people review the code, and bugs still get by. This doesn't look like a bug, it looks like someone chose to use an atom that is, here, equivalent, and that could've been replaced with another one that might've been clearer for some people to skim.

    Because it's open sourced software, you were able to find this code that you don't like and complain about it. You're also able to produce and send in a patch, which I'm sure you did. You're also able to watch p5 changesets and notice changes or checkin
    --
    rjbs
  • You probably read CPAN.pm's documentation as well and found

    CPAN.pm is regularly tested to run under 5.004, 5.005, and assorted newer versions.

    And you looked into perl5005delta:

    New regular expression constructs
    The following new syntax elements are supported:
    ...
    \z
  • CPAN.pm was written before \z existed. It came in this patch [activestate.com] back in 1998 which is 5.005ish.

    Even now CPAN.pm attempts to maintain 5.004 compatibility, so no \z.

    Think about things in context a bit, that code is over 12 years old. See for yourself [cpan.org].
  • Doesn't anybody but the maintainers ever check what goes into a core module?

    Check what? What exactly would you like these notional code-checkers to check for? Do you have some sort of list of coding standards that all core modules should adhere to? Where can we find it? Where did the list of coding standards come from?

    --

    --
    xoa