in reply to No more Perl "compiler"

I'd never even seen the thing work. If it works for you perhaps you'd consider maintaining it? You never commented to my p5p post of several months ago about removing it.

⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: No more Perl "compiler"
by jdhedden (Deacon) on Sep 12, 2006 at 20:12 UTC
    If it works for you perhaps you'd consider maintaining it?
    You're joking, right? Just because I used it successfully as advertised doesn't mean that I'm familiar enough with its internal workings to be able to maintain/fix/improve it. (Otherwise, I would have considered breaking it out as a separate CPAN module.)
    You never commented to my p5p post of several months ago about removing it.
    I must have missed it. However, I'm not gainsaying the decision to remove it: If its a failed feature, then it should be removed. My post was meant to inform others of its removal, and to query about possible alternatives.
    Remember: There's always one more bug.
[reply]

      If it works for you perhaps you'd consider maintaining it?
      You're joking, right? Just because I used it successfully as advertised doesn't mean that I'm familiar enough with its internal workings to be able to maintain/fix/improve it. (Otherwise, I would have considered breaking it out as a separate CPAN module.)
      No, I wasn't joking. I think you're really capable and could do it.

      My post was meant to inform others of its removal, and to query about possible alternatives.
      For your purpose you'd switch to some persistent environment like what you already suggested or pperl.

      ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

[reply]
Re^2: No more Perl "compiler"
by OverlordQ (Hermit) on Sep 13, 2006 at 13:40 UTC
[reply]

      No, B::Deparse is fine - for one thing Storable relies on it to serialize CODE references.

      /J\

[reply]

In Section Meditations