Re: Healthcheck and the Perl Future

I'm also getting redirected to heise.de.

web.archive.org has snapshots of http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/Healthcheck-Perl-The-Perl-Future--/features/112388/0 going back to 2016, all of which also do the same redirect. Is this supposed to be a recent article? Is it supposed to be accessible?

Comment on Re: Healthcheck and the Perl Future

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Healthcheck and the Perl Future by Anonymous Monk on Feb 09, 2025 at 20:21 UTC
Enjoy :-), and click pages 2 .. 4 from there	[reply]
Re^2: Healthcheck and the Perl Future by Anonymous Monk on Feb 10, 2025 at 03:37 UTC
is this supposed to be a recent article? jfc, you've been here 22 years and you don't know how to see the date (and time) on which a node was posted?	[reply]
Re^3: Healthcheck and the Perl Future by Jenda (Abbot) on Feb 10, 2025 at 15:59 UTC
You always look at the tiny little date if you arrive to a post through a recently made comment? ;-) It's a nice read though ... naively optimistic and funny. Jenda 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a manual!	[reply]
Re^4: Healthcheck and the Perl Future by etj (Priest) on Feb 10, 2025 at 18:34 UTC
I've done quite a few necroposts, but for some reason just missed that the one I was looking at here was a (very, in 2025) old post. That would have been clearer to others if I'd replied to the 2025 comment, instead of the original.	[reply]
Re^3: Healthcheck and the Perl Future by etj (Priest) on Feb 10, 2025 at 18:37 UTC
From my profile: User since: Dec 30, 2013 at 20:33 UTC (11 years ago) If you meant me as someone who's been here 22 years, then neither of us knows what you're talking about.	[reply]
Re^4: Healthcheck and the Perl Future by Anonymous Monk on Feb 10, 2025 at 20:17 UTC
sorry, I think I must have typo'd `11`.	[reply]


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks