Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 01:33:22PM -0700, Edward Peschko wrote: > > > I'd really rather not, and I don't think that was Larry's intention. I > > > think rather it was "perl 5 warning/strict levels", not "parse as perl 5 > > > code". At least I hope that's the case... > > > well, personally I would rather that this *is* done, because it forces perl > > 6's architecture to be solid. > > Only as solid as Perl 5's. And remember we're throwing that one > away. :) 'Solid enough to parse and run Perl 5 code with no changes to that code' is very different from 'Only as solid as Perl 5'. -- Piers
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Simon Cozens
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Sugalski
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Sugalski
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Simon Cozens
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Sugalski
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Edward Peschko
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Brian
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Dan Sugalski
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Edward Peschko
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Simon Cozens
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Piers Cawley
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Glenn Linderman
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Michael G Schwern
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 Ted Ashton
- Perl 5 compatibility (Re: Larry's Apocalyps... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Perl 5 compatibility (Re: Larry's A... John Porter
- Re: Perl 5 compatibility (Re: Larr... Dave Storrs
- Re: Perl 5 compatibility (Re: Larr... John Porter
- Re: Perl 5 compatibility (Re: Larry's A... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Perl 5 compatibility (Re: Larry's A... James Mastros
- Re: Larry's Apocalypse 1 John Porter