On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 12:50:48PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> >I've got 5.004_04, 5.004_05, 5.005_03, 5.6.1 and bleadperl installed
> >to test against. Should I bother with 5.004? Is anyone *seriously*
> >using it still?
>
> MacPerl, until 5.6.1 comes out of beta (it's still in alpha, now). An
On Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:11:41 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>I've got 5.004_04, 5.004_05, 5.005_03, 5.6.1 and bleadperl installed
>to test against. Should I bother with 5.004? Is anyone *seriously*
>using it still?
MacPerl, until 5.6.1 comes out of beta (it's still in alpha, now). And
perhaps
I do know of a couple who are. They mentioned it on perl-5-meta.
On Wednesday 22 August 2001 21:11, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I've got 5.004_04, 5.004_05, 5.005_03, 5.6.1 and bleadperl installed
> to test against. Should I bother with 5.004? Is anyone *seriously*
> using it still?
>
>
> PS Wh
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 09:11:41PM -0400, Michael Schwern wrote:
> I've got 5.004_04, 5.004_05, 5.005_03, 5.6.1 and bleadperl installed
> to test against. Should I bother with 5.004? Is anyone *seriously*
> using it still?
>
>
> PS When I say 5.004, I mean the original 5.004 release.
If
I've got 5.004_04, 5.004_05, 5.005_03, 5.6.1 and bleadperl installed
to test against. Should I bother with 5.004? Is anyone *seriously*
using it still?
PS When I say 5.004, I mean the original 5.004 release.
--
Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl
