in reply to Re^2: Successful CSV reader?
in thread Successful CSV reader?

jZed,
...but I wish you and dragonchild would quit spreading FUD about Text::CSV_XS.

I take offense to that. I only said I believed Text::CSV_xSV worked in cases where the other two did not. The focus was on the the use of the test suites anyway.

And what FUD exactly? Besides this thread, I have mentioned Text::xSV two other times and neither was condemning the other modules.

This post has been changed to reflect real information and not perceived information. I recognize jZed's point about spreading rumors which is why I didn't state my beliefs as being facts

Cheers - L~R

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Successful CSV reader?
by jZed (Prior) on Apr 26, 2005 at 17:23 UTC

    update Limbic-Region and I have said this to each other in /msgs but it bears public repeating - we're not trying to attck each other here and I for one apologize if it appears that I am.

    update2 (after L~R's update to his node) Again, I apologize for accusing you of spreading FUD. I do believe what you said is FUD, but that doesn't mean that it was your intention to spread it. I also think your suggestion to the OP to use the test suites of the other modules was an excellent suggestion.

    L~R I quoted the part of your text I objected to which was the part where you said that Text::xSV works in cases where Text::CSV_XS breaks. If you have evidence to support that claim, please present it. If you do not have evidence, please stop claiming it. Text::xSV is without a doubt, the best pure perl CSV parser around. It has the best interface of any CSV parser. But neither of those facts adds up to it being either faster than or better at edge cases than the C-based Text::CSV_XS. Again, I have no problem with you recommending Text::xSV, I also recommend it when appropriate. I do have a problem with you making claims about other modules without evidence to back it up.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom