You contradict yourself. You say the talk is embarrassing (and it is), that it's amazing that CGI.pm was patched to warn about this; then you complain that CGI.pm is "about to get real stupid" by breaking backwards compatibility. Do you not see the contradiction? Sometimes we have to break backwards compatibility to fix issues like this, and the "real stupid" thing is to turn a blind eye and say "well, it's legacy code so fuck it". Doing *that* gives Netanel Rubin, et al, even more fuel for their FUD.
The fix highlighted in your post only breaks back compatibility for those with fatal warnings enabled - arguably those users with fatal warnings enabled are the most concerned about problems like these. As i've previously stated - v4 releases of CGI.pm will be back compatible (as much as can be when issues like this arise). v5 and beyond *may* not be. CGI.pm is no longer core and Lincoln has trusted me to DTRT. Regarding the v5 releases: "I am altering the deal, pray I don’t alter it any further."
-
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
-
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
<u> <ul>
-
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
intervention).
-
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.
|
