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.
  • Yeah, I'm assuming there's a "not" missing there and, based on that assumption, I absolute agree.

    I have trouble understanding the arguments against adopting a regular release schedule. The implication is that quality will suffer if releases are made based on the date rather than the readiness of the code - which would be true if the pumpking just bundled and shipped whatever was in the repo at that point in time - but that's not at all what's being proposed. And co-opting DarkPAN to endorse the current rele

    • > or even if it exists

      I think it's fairly clear that it exists.

      • And also that there’s a lot of it. But it doesn’t get any more tangible than that.

        And in reality the question is how to balance the needs of the past DarkPAN against the needs of the future DarkPAN. Also, how much past DarkPAN code is affected by the regressions of 5.10.0? It’s not one unknown pushing back; there’s an equally big unknown pushing forward that is rarely ever considered.

        • > But it doesn’t get any more tangible than that.

          Except for the 50,000,000 lines of it identified here [ohloh.net].

          • That’s the GreyPAN (= open source Perl code that’s not on CPAN).

          • Except for the 50,000,000 lines of it identified here [ohloh.net].

            I think that's a nice sample of what is out there, GreyPAN-wise, and I will be one of the first to congratulate you if you are able to convince the stalwarts to accept that as a representative sample, and perl5 progresses from there.

            However, being in science (primarily) and being human (unfortunately secondarily), I know that there will always be a very vocal few who will refuse to acknowledge such evidence and cling to the precious little bits that support their view. Hopefully with enough support (and ma

            • > However, being in science (primarily) and being human (unfortunately secondarily), I know that there will always be a very vocal few who will refuse to acknowledge such evidence and cling to the precious little bits that support their view.

              In the face of actual implementations of proof (or implementations of alternatives that make the original argument moot) people usually come around.

              It's happened a number of times.