in reply to What is a really old version of Perl?
I've argued this a few times myself. Work uses a combination of just-barely-in-support Solaris boxes and RHEL 5. 5.8 is the new version of perl that's supported - if it needs to run on all the boxes I need it to work with 5.6.
Yes, I know it's out of date. Yes, I know we should upgrade. That is not my decision and not under my control - and if I try to sideload a newer version I'd get fired. A better job would be welcomed, but this one isn't worse than most from what I've seen, and it would cost me $10k to move.
Besides, from a system administration viewpoint, staying on these old versions makes sense - and programming is only a small portion of my job.
I don't mind an answer that uses newer perl syntax and features - I can translate back to a two-argument open (or whatever) if I need to. What I do mind is the attitude that I shouldn't be worth talking to because I have this requirement to run under older perls, or that a minor update in a module should be expected to break for me, even if there is no reason for it to. (From the 5.6, there is often a good reason, I'll admit.)
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^2: What is a really old version of Perl?
by Tux (Canon) on Jun 27, 2012 at 12:36 UTC |