>On Friday 03 December 2010 at 16:53, Leon Timmermans wrote:
>> We do, honestly. I'm tired of having to explain to newbies why the
>> official perl documentation is not strict friendly, when I tell them
>> they should use strict. **I don't know how to explain that to them**,
>> it simply doesn't c
>On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Tom Christiansen wrote:
>>> We need to make it use strict friendly.
>>
>> No, we do not. =C2=A0Vide fricking supra.
>We do, honestly. I'm tired of having to explain to newbies why the
>official perl documentation is not strict friendly, when I tell them
>they shou
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Tom Christiansen wrote:
>> We need to make it use strict friendly.
>
> No, we do not. Vide fricking supra.
We do, honestly. I'm tired of having to explain to newbies why the
official perl documentation is not strict friendly, when I tell them
they should use stric
On 2010-12-03 13:49, Shlomi Fish wrote:
after I posted my series of patches to perlipc.pod , I saw that tchrist posted
his version, which got accepted immediately. As a downside to that, I'll have
to restart my work. However, I noticed that perlipc.pod still has many
perceived issues. Here is a
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 07:46:09PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2010 19:30:14 David Golden wrote:
> > Let me say to all in the thread so far that my general reaction to the
> > original list was "hmm. seems fairly reasonable".
> >
> > However, I think that if we take the emot
> after I posted my series of patches to perlipc.pod , I saw that
> tchrist posted his version, which got accepted immediately. As a
> downside to that, I'll have to restart my work. However, I noticed
> that perlipc.pod still has many perceived issues.
Having real issues is quite distinct from h
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 03:43:30PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2010 15:25:14 demerphq wrote:
> > On 3 December 2010 13:49, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > after I posted my series of patches to perlipc.pod , I saw that tchrist
> > > posted his version, which got
>They are still important, because the people who are trying to help the Perl
>beginners, are often presented with badly written code, and having code like
>that in the core Perl documentation only amplifies the problem, and makes us
>look bad.
That is *not* badly written code.
--tom
On 3 December 2010 14:43, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2010 15:25:14 demerphq wrote:
>> On 3 December 2010 13:49, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > after I posted my series of patches to perlipc.pod , I saw that tchrist
>> > posted his version, which got accepted immediately
On 3 December 2010 13:49, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> after I posted my series of patches to perlipc.pod , I saw that tchrist posted
> his version, which got accepted immediately. As a downside to that, I'll have
> to restart my work. However, I noticed that perlipc.pod still has many
> perce
10 matches
Mail list logo
