On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 06:18:38PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
>
> I'm very much wishing that P::V can disappear entirely in Perl6, and I'm
> probably going to confirm that on the p6l list, because in the end it's
> just a nasty hack.
I find P::V quite useful, and more elegant that the longer-win
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ovid wrote:
No. I was trusting my boss's reasoning for not wanting to use P::V and
when I saw all of that documentation when I just wanted to check the
darned keys, I thought "I don't need all of that."
Well, it's definitely overhead. The question is if it's much more
o
--- Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wasn't asking about P::V's disabled mode (I never use that either),
> I
> was asking if you actually know its performance hit is too much in
> its
> enabled mode. Have you benchmarked?
No. I was trusting my boss's reasoning for not wanting t
--- "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even if Iâve not convinced you, I know this will be what Iâll be
> doing henceforth. :-)
OK, I'm convinced. I played around with it for a bit it's close to
what I want. The reason it didn't seem like an option at first is the
documentation doe
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Ken Williams wrote:
So if I want to avoid the performance impact of Params::Validate, I
have to not do what I want to do.
I wasn't asking about P::V's disabled mode (I never use that either), I was
asking if you actually know its performance hit is too much in its enabled
On Aug 13, 2005, at 12:25 PM, Ovid wrote:
--- Mark Stosberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 07:27:56AM -0500, Ken Williams wrote:
Before discounting it, have you measured the actual resource impact?
I would hope it would be fairly minimal, in it's mode of disabling
valid
Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Sometimes the CPAN doesn't provide the trivial things I need. For
> example, I am often doing something conceptually similar to this:
>
> sub foo {
> my $args = shift;
> croak $message unless is_deeply [sort keys %$args], [EMAIL PROTECTED];
