comment on

In that case, it was always a bug, it just wasn't reported by Perl as such.

Maybe it wasn't reported as a bug because it was a feature? I'm curious how "fixing" that particular "bug" really improved Perl? Does it 1) make new things possible, or 2) make things that should have worked function properly, or does it just remove one of a million shortcuts and 3) break the holy grail: CPAN? (I understand what is "wrong" with for qw(), but don't care! DWIM)

if you are interested in actually fixing the problems

My preferences in order:

1. Someone never decided to cause this problem.
2. Someone with more power and skill fixes the problem.
   a. Repair Perl backwards compatability.
   b. Repair CPAN distributions.
3. I fix the problem locally and am happy that it works.
4. I have to work to fix the problem for everyone.

I know you want me to do 4 because of 3 but I'm looking at 1 with an occasional glance at 2a =)

In reply to Re^4: p5p vs CPAN by Anonymous Monk
in thread p5p vs CPAN by Anonymous Monk

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.


laziness, impatience, and hubris
	PerlMonks