On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 10:50:16AM +0000 Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 07:32:56AM +0100, Tassilo von Parseval wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 11:48:37AM +0000 Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
>
> > > You will probaly get better informed audience for your question on p5p.
> >
> > That seems to be the policy, but I try to avoid that whenever possible.
> > As I need these information for a module, it's not really core-related.
> > Only from a technical point of view.
>
> Given the level of traffic on this list, and on perl5-porters, and the large
> technical overlap in most of the questions asked, I'd be quite happy if the
> two were to merge.
Seconded, even if it seems to contradict what I previously said.
> The biggest downside I can see to that is the occasional
> verbose "this XS&C code doesn't work" messages which would be rather out of
> place on perl5-porters.
Those messages are only a non-major fraction of the total traffic (which
is fairly low anyway).
> This is partly a marketing thing - I'm wondering if it would help get XS code
> authors more involved in the perl core.
XS is the entry point for perl-porting. Furthermore, many of the
interesting stuff can't be done with the 'public' XS API so one needs to
dig in the perl sources anyway (this thread was just another example for
such a public-APIly unsolvable problem).
I would however make a brief note on perl5-porters so that everyone
knows (or can at least object so that basic democratic principles are
seemingly sustained;-).
Tassilo
--
$_=q#",}])!JAPH!qq(tsuJ[{@"tnirp}3..0}_$;//::niam/s~=)]3[))_$-3(rellac(=_$({
pam{rekcahbus})(rekcah{lrePbus})(lreP{rehtonabus})!JAPH!qq(rehtona{tsuJbus#;
$_=reverse,s+(?<=sub).+q#q!'"qq.\t$&."'!#+sexisexiixesixeseg;y~\n~~dddd;eval
