in reply to Re^6: Darwin and File::HomeDir
in thread Darwin and File::HomeDir

The user being discussed in this thread is the code writer who writes

Actually, no. I'm the only one who used the term, and I was referring to the user the of the script.

If you think that, then why you suggest a patch for File::HomeDir documentation?

To try to avoid the creation of buggy modules.

File::HomeDir is working as designed. There is no bug in File::HomeDir.

That's what I said.I agree, I never said there was.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Darwin and File::HomeDir
by Anonymous Monk on May 21, 2011 at 23:09 UTC
    If you believe that, then what was all that stuff about imposing limits on users? You're switching your argument midstream, just to keep the thread going.

[reply]

      I never thought there was a bug in File::HomeDir, and I never said I did. I said the only thing that can be done is to add a warning to File::HomeDir's documentation, and that anything else would have detrimental effects or would be near impossible.

[reply]
        I never thought there was a bug in File::HomeDir, and I never said I did. I said the only thing that can be done is to add a warning to File::HomeDir's documentation, and that anything else would have detrimental effects or would be near impossible.

        I don't understand your confusion, so I can't answer your question.

        You said

        Trying to impose limits on the user to kowtow to broken some modules sounds backwards to me.

        Trying to convince OS vendors to change their practices to address bugs in modules sounds backwards to me.

        If you weren't talking about File::HomeDir, then what were you talking about?
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom