I should have announced that before...
For those of you that haven't noticed already :
I'm writing a weekly summary of what's happening there, that
gets published on use.perl on mondays.
Here's the second one :
http://use.perl.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/15/0732235
On Mon, 15 Jul 2002, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > Don't it always? Here's the revelant paragraph:
> >
> > "With OS Release 3.02 and later, these functions are provided in the -lc89
> > library. For earlier releases, use -lucb from the compat package."
> >
> > So my mission is to get -lc89 see
Hello,
I would like to propose a change to the perlfaq4 pod page.
I think mentioning the OO date modules would be good in there in
a question. From a business-developer's viewpoint (Java, C#) it is an
important question if perl has OO date "type" or not. I think our supply
is quite good (Class::
On Wed 10 Jul 2002 10:55, Rafael Garcia-Suarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> FYI :
> I've successfully compiled/tested the latest snapshot on AIX
> 4.3.3 with the IBM-supplied gcc (2.9-aix51-020209) (and with
> the default Configure options.)
Is it a 64bit machine? Could you test -Duse64bitall?
On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 11:54:53PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>
> > 2. I would also move the "Incompatibilities" section to the end of the
> > announcement. Most users of Perl are not interested in these advanced
> > features themselves. They download modules with advanced features and
This is a build failure report for perl from [EMAIL PROTECTED],
generated with the help of perlbug 1.34 running under perl v5.8.0.
-
[Please enter your report here]
WinNT4, SP6a, MingW 1.1
Failed TestStat Wstat Total Fail F
