On Thu, 03 Aug 2000, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 08:36:01PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > > Keep default Perl free of constraints such as warnings and strict.
> >
> > I second this.
>
> I third this. Perl is not, nor do I believe it ever should become, a B&D
> language by default. "Making easy things easy", remember that?
I'll go a step further and state that Perl shouldn't mutate any of its
features, at least on the language side. Delete deprecated (or heavily
warned against) features? Sure, if they're that old or that bad. Add
features? Sure, that's okay, too.
But change how Perl reacts, when nothing else has changed? The
previous discussion about localtime had it right - if you want to
change the indexing, or the semantics, create something other than
localtime().
(I even disagree with changing the return value of system(), the
blasphemer I am.)
Change will be inevitable, I'm sure, and the changes that the Perl
community and Larry want I'll support. I'm probably suggesting
changes myself that will change the look of feel of "classic" Perl,
rather than extending it, though I try hard not to. It's more than
just backwards compatibility for a myriad scripts that concerns me - I'm
sure we'll come up with a software solution for that. I'm concerned
about the myriad scriptors that we aren't going to be able to patch.
To make a bad analogy, it's like a TV show amidst a recast. Add a new
character out of the blue? Well, okay, I can buy that. Kill a
character off? Umm, I can live with that too, I guess. But to tell me
that Dick York and Dick Sargent are the same Darrin Stephens? It's a
little disconcerting to look at.
-- Bryan C. Warnock
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
