Re^6: sort AoH buggy? (deprecation candidate)

NB: I said deprecation candidate

I doubt it's complicated to transform

but YMMV.

In the end this would boil down to using pragmas to keep old code afloat. And consequently to a similar discussion like use v7; was.

Problem is that the community has no agreement about the goals and their target groups.

I'd say they can't even communicate about that, at least in a productive way.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery}

Comment on Re^6: sort AoH buggy? (deprecation candidate) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: sort AoH buggy? (deprecation candidate) by hippo (Archbishop) on Dec 10, 2021 at 22:54 UTC
I doubt it's complicated to transform ... Not at all in one line of a 20-line script. But to do it reliably across many files in a 1,000,000 line codebase without breaking anything? That's a different matter entirely. Never mind the shops who are running 15-year-old Perl systems with no Perl maintainer on the books. a similar discussion like `use v7;` was. Quite so. I applaud the enthusiasm of those who proposed it but to do so in a language which has always striven for backwards compatibility was inevitably going to be a big task. For every agile developer crying, "Throw it all out!" there is a sysadm or project manager with a legacy burden screaming "Keep it all in!". 🦛	[reply] [d/l]
Re^8: sort AoH buggy? (deprecation candidate) by LanX (Saint) on Dec 10, 2021 at 23:11 UTC
I think it's more complicated and the real problem is communication. Anyway pragmas are the solution for most of this, and we already did this with `strict` which changed the language considerably. Create something like a symlink `perl7` pointing to `perl` and whenever the executable is run under the new name it'll activate `use v7;` automatically. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply] [d/l] [select]