RE: what slow could be in Compress::Zlib? (was RE: 5.004_xx in the wild?)
From: Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:19:16PM +0100, Paul Marquess wrote: Whilst I'm here, when I do get around to posting a beta on CPAN, I'd prefer it doesn't get used in anger until it has bedded-in. If I give the module a version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN shell ignore it? This is often done incorrectly. See Lperlmodstyle/Version numbering for the correct WTDI: $VERSION = 2.000_00;# let EU::MM and co. see the _ $XS_VERSION = $VERSION; # XS_VERSION has to be an actual string $VERSION = eval $VERSION; # but VERSION has to be a number Just doing $VERSION = 2.000_00 doesn't get the _ into the actual distribution version, and just doing $VERSION = 2.000_00 makes use Compress::Zlib 1.0; give a warning (because it does: 1.0 = 2.000_00 internally, and _ doesn't work in numified strings). But if you are doing a beta leading up to a 2.000 release, it should be numbered 2.000, e.g. 1.990_01. Nothing wrong with a 2.000_01 beta in preparation for a release 2.010 or whatever, though. Thanks for the comprehensive answer folks. Much appreciated. Paul ___ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
RE: what slow could be in Compress::Zlib? (was RE: 5.004_xx in the wild?)
From: Konovalov, Vadim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I've just been through the should-I-shouldn't-I-support-5.4 with my (painfully slow) rewrite of Compress::Zlib. In the end I ... I always thought that Compress::Zlib is just a wrapper around zlib which in turn is C and developed elsewhere (and in stable state for a long time now). Yes, that is mostly true, but there have been a few changes made to zlib of late that I want to make available in my module (the ability to append to existing gzip/deflate streams being one). Plus I had a list of new features/enhancements I wanted to add that have been sitting on a TODO list for ages. The top issue in my mailbox for Compress::Zlib is the portability of the zlib gzopen/read/write interface. I've now completely removed all dependencies on the zlib gzopen code and written the equivalent of that interface in Perl. A side-effect of that decision is that I now have complete read/write access to the gzip headers fields. Another reason is provide better support for HTTP content encoding. I can now autodetect and uncompress any of the three zlib-related compression formats used in HTTP content-encoding, i.e. RFC1950/1/2 etc, etc... What is (painfully slow) rewrite? I don't have as much time to dabble these days, so I've been working at it on and (mostly) off for at least a year. Whilst I'm here, when I do get around to posting a beta on CPAN, I'd prefer it doesn't get used in anger until it has bedded-in. If I give the module a version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN shell ignore it? Paul ___ How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
Re: what slow could be in Compress::Zlib? (was RE: 5.004_xx in the wild?)
Paul Marquess wrote: Whilst I'm here, when I do get around to posting a beta on CPAN, I'd prefer it doesn't get used in anger until it has bedded-in. If I give the module a version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN shell ignore it? Indeed, if a distribution is numbered with such a number, it is not indexed by PAUSE, and therefore can't be installed from CPAN/CPANPLUS Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni -- - --- -- - -- - --- -- - --- -- - --[ http://maddingue.org ] Close the world, txEn eht nepO
Re: what slow could be in Compress::Zlib? (was RE: 5.004_xx in the wild?)
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:19:16PM +0100, Paul Marquess wrote: Whilst I'm here, when I do get around to posting a beta on CPAN, I'd prefer it doesn't get used in anger until it has bedded-in. If I give the module a version number like 2.000_00, will the CPAN shell ignore it? This is often done incorrectly. See Lperlmodstyle/Version numbering for the correct WTDI: $VERSION = 2.000_00;# let EU::MM and co. see the _ $XS_VERSION = $VERSION; # XS_VERSION has to be an actual string $VERSION = eval $VERSION; # but VERSION has to be a number Just doing $VERSION = 2.000_00 doesn't get the _ into the actual distribution version, and just doing $VERSION = 2.000_00 makes use Compress::Zlib 1.0; give a warning (because it does: 1.0 = 2.000_00 internally, and _ doesn't work in numified strings). But if you are doing a beta leading up to a 2.000 release, it should be numbered 2.000, e.g. 1.990_01. Nothing wrong with a 2.000_01 beta in preparation for a release 2.010 or whatever, though.
