All these years I've never been there; but then why would I? There's no reference to it from search cpan that I can see ...

I thought this was interesting....

In case you didn't know, neilb ( at search.cpan.org/~neilb/ ) uses this module as an example of a deprecated module. Furthermore, he uses it as an example of how a distribution maintainer can set the x_deprecated flag ( as explained at neilb.org/2015/01/17/deprecated-metad... ).

I wonder what setting that flag does ... oh that! Underwhelming.

If using http://search.cpan.org it does actually display the current rating (as stars) and number of reviews on the page of search results, e.g. at time of writing it displays WWW::Mechanize has 4.5/5 stars and 16 reviews.

http://metacpan.org also displays this on the search results page, even more helpful is that the rating/number of reviews also show up on the left hand side of the modules page, along with a bunch of other useful information, e.g. WWW::Mechanize.

Hm. Switch currently shows "1 review" and a rating of ***.

But clicking through it displays 2 essentially negative reviews; 1 rating of *** by the guy that wrote:

I would use all the time if it did not completely confuse the Perl interpreter's idea of line numbering. Introduction of this switch makes debugging a nightmare, throwing off all line nubmer reporting in the module in which it is used.

And one "hidden unhelpful review" that I cannot view. Presumably I could if I enabled JS but ...

I guess if "makes debugging a nightmare" is ***; then there is just no point to having a rating mechanism.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.