On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:52:44PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
qr// is the only
thing I really miss.
After spending/wasting a couple of hours trying to do regex tests with
just 'ok', I agree.
like() takes a string.
like( $foo, qr/regex/ ); # same
like( $foo,
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 05:21:01PM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
Unfortunately, upgrading isn't always an option. Anyone can type
$ ./Configure -des make make test install
but putting the results of such a command into a base operating system
installation, testing that said operating
On 7/5/05, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I feel your pain and I will share it. How far each author goes down
the backwards compatibility route is obviously up to them, and as a
volunteer effort no one has any right to get upset about their decision.
Wasn't one of the goals of
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 included limited
support for 5.004 because I could, plus I have no feel for how much pain I
would cause folk if I didn't.
If anyone cares about this enough to do
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 12:37:28PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
If anyone cares about this enough to do something about it, I've
previously outlined a scheme for supporting statistics in CPAN in a way
that covers all the bases (including #perl picking it apart for about a
day).
The problem
Michael G Schwern wrote:
[...]
That said, here's the main differences:
* No qr//. Even if you target 5.5.4 qr// still has lots of bugs.
[...]
Once you go through the initial pain of backporting its not too big a deal
to keep things working as long as you're not doing XS. qr// is the only
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 10:59:53AM +0200, David Landgren wrote:
I like to use constant when I can, but the further you go back in time
the more brain-damaged it becomes. I think in 5.005 it only knows about
scalars. No hashrefs or arrayrefs allowed. I find this is a bit of a
bugger to work
As someone whose production code is currently required to run under
5.5.3, I'm very grateful to module authors whose code still runs under
that version at least. A number of modules which don't run under 5.5.3
do with simple changes, primarily changing our to use vars and
getting rid of x.y.z
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
Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And if so, were people actively
developing using it or was it just there to run
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
I've seen it on occasion, and it's general on large old IRIX servers,
and similar aged things. CVS repositories and other boxes that have
provided the same services pretty much forever and have never had a
compelling reason to
On 7/4/05, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And if so, were people actively
developing using
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And if so
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
drop 5.004 compatability. There's no excuse other than if it ain't broke,
don't fix it for running such an archaic Perl. People should be encouraged
to move to a more
From: Michael G Schwern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
drop 5.004 compatability. There's no excuse other than if it ain't
broke,
don't fix it for running such an
Ben Evans wrote:
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 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
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:00:14AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0100, Ben Evans wrote:
I would say that this cascade effect is precisely why you *should*
drop 5.004 compatability. There's no excuse
Paul Johnson wrote:
As someone whose production code is currently required to run under
5.5.3, I'm very grateful to module authors whose code still runs under
that version at least. A number of modules which don't run under 5.5.3
do with simple changes, primarily changing our to use vars and
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 03:59:23PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
I've only developed in 5.6+ environments. Can anyone provide a link to
what I would have to do to make my modules compatible with 5.4 and/or 5.5?
Step one: Install 5.4.5 and 5.5.4.
Step two: Try out your module with them.
Michael G Schwern wrote:
That said, here's the main differences:
Thanks. My modules are sufficiently non-evil that I should be able to
compensate for these differences.
jimk
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,
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
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 05:40:20PM -0400, James E Keenan wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
That said, here's the main differences:
I'm about a year out from seeing a Perl 4 in the wild, so, I'll assume
that early Perl 5's can be found if you look long enough.
Steve Peters
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm going through some work to restore Test::More and Test::Harness to work
on 5.4.5, minor stuff really, and I'm wondering if its worth the trouble.
Has anyone seen 5.004_xx in the wild? And if so, were people actively
developing using it or was it just there to run some old code and they
were
25 matches
Mail list logo
