On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:45:45AM -0800, Robert Spier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said
something similar to:
> > Can't we just commit and move on?
>
> I don't feel comfortable committing something for which I have some
> reservations, but if someone else (from the other 15 people on the
> list) chimes in positively, I will.
I'd like to see less "defending" and more "editing". Not only by
making the new wording/examples cleaner, but by not submitting doc
patches with typos (ispell is your friend).
I'm also, specifically, not convinced this change is the best:
- $text =~ s/\$(\w+)/${$1}/g; # no /e needed
+ $text = '@{[ system "rm -rf /" ]}'
Especially, since that is a poor use of system(), and -T should catch it. So, as
Robert said, "People still learn perl poorly, and still write things
"the old bad way" that needs to be fixed."
Anyways, I wouldn't mind seeing the patch reworked, even if in smaller
bits at a time to get it "just right".
My 2.33423 YEN.
Cheers,
Kevin
>
> > BTW: Where can I find an archive of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> The general answer is google.
>
> The specific answer is http://nntp.perl.org/
>
> -R
--
[Writing CGI Applications with Perl - http://perlcgi-book.com]
Don't mind your make-up, you'd better make your mind up.
-- Frank Zappa
