They already told me to write a patch....to do exactly this. This is my result. Besides I am not a part of p5p -- I have been specifically excluded from them by their leadership.
Therefore, it does not make sense to hold this up over such - as they've already indicated they don't need to discuss things with me. Check the archives around last October, I think. Ricardo was fully supported in throwing a hissy fit over something dreadfully mundane. It was so obviously mundane that it became clear that no excuse was needed. They just wanted me to go off and prove myself by myself. To say such things and then place road blocks to including those things they told me to go write CPAN code for is bad cricket. brian d foy wrote: > [[ This message was both posted and mailed: see > the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]] > > In article <20130320044811.4e0fe1f...@pause.perl.org>, "Perl Authors > Upload Server" <upl...@pause.perl.org> wrote: > > >> The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module List: >> >> modid: mem >> DSLIP: bdppp >> description: allow use of in-'mem' copy of package; >> userid: LAWALSH (Linda A Walsh) >> chapterid: 2 (Language_Extensions) >> communities: >> >> similar: >> >> rationale: >> >> it's a pragma that allows one to use the in memory copy of a >> package without fetching it from disk. >> > > This sounds very interesting, but we typically defer to p5p on new > pragma names. > >
