David Golden wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Linda W <perl-didd...@tlinx.org> wrote:
>
>> I don't recall anything offensive or personal in my submission
>>
>
> I believe it was the "Ricardo throwing a hissy fit" comment in your
> followup. That took it from "please register this name" to "here's my
> personal problem with p5p".
>
----
Well, that was my idea of making light of a situation that no one can
explain the
exact reason why -- i.e. if you look at the post that trigged that -- a
story from a drivers
ed class I took 20 some odd years ago, it's hard to see why he responded
the way he
did, UNLESS, I unknowingly struck a nerve somewhere, but there'd be no
way I could
know that -- so the response seemed completely disproportional to the
stimulus.
As such, I figured, that it wasn't the stimulus that was important, but
ANY stimulus
that would have provided the same response. Living with the sword of
Damocles
over your head would tend to make you a bit more defensive than the
average person --
perhaps to the point of attempting to fight back before your head is cut
off. Of course
doing so would be likely to hasten what is seen as the inevitable
outcome -- the result
being that the outcome is more likely to happen sooner, as it involves
less "pre-beheading"
torture.
>
> You may feel that Matt's comments to you were a personal attack. I
> grant they were *personal* in that they described your observed
> behaviors. However, they related directly to your comments, whereas
> your "hissy fit" remarks were not relevant to a registration request.
>
----
Nor were they in the initial registration request -- only when I
told I needed to
go back and submit to the sword of Damocles, for more torture, did that
come up
(albeit, it wasn't phrased that way, but unfortunately, seeing 12+ years
of history
on that list be burned up in a few months made me a little uneasy.
> On a more positive note, you've had two suggestions that the module
> needs a different -- non-lowercase -- name.
>
---
A more complicated implementation has already been done. It failed
to catch
on. I asked a pragma to allow perl to use an already in memory copy of
a module and
not go out on disk. I was told that wasn't something they wanted to do
-- and that I should
go implement such on CPAN first.
I did, and now that advice to implement the pragma on CPAN first is
forgotten and
I'm being asked to hide the pragma under a module name when it isn't a
module nor does
it function like one.
Hopefully you won't see this response as a personal attack nor impolite.
