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
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
CPAN (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
That's because they have no choice.
Re: (Score:1)
I feel like I don't have a choice, but not for reasons you'd like. Perl tends to be very important and lots of things need it. As a result sysadmins get touchy about upgrading it because they don't know what will break. Sure, you get distros to include the new Perl, but sysadmins are also touchy about upgrading operating systems on production machines. However it is fairly easy to get those same sysadmins to agree to upgrading one Perl library. Particularly if it isn't being used by a lot of things oth
Re: (Score:1)
I invite you to consider the history of Lisp and Tcl, which took the same approach. "It's okay that there's no standard, built-in way to do $X. You can just roll your own! The rest of this thread will show you several different approaches before it falls apart in nitpickery."
If 98% of maintainable Perl 5 programs start with the same two lines of code, I can make a good argument that those two lines are boilerplate that a future version of Perl 5 should remove.
Sometimes the right default is useful.
Re:CPAN (Score:1)
I would see no problem with that if it was dependent on the user to declare their intended version. For example, couldn't 'use 5.010;' imply strict and warnings? Like it now implies all features in the 5.10.0 bundle?
Ordinary morality is for ordinary people. -- Aleister Crowley
Reply to This
Parent