Re: RFC 146 (v1) Remove socket functions from core

[Chaim Frenkel]

>>>>> "TC" == Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

TC> Perl is *not* fun when it supplies nothing by default, the way C does(n't).

TC> If you want a language that can do nothing by itself, fine, but don't
TC> call it Perl.  Given these:


I'm not sure that we are talking about the same thing.

My understanding of -internals (and Dan) is that all the current perl
(or whatever Larry leaves) will continue to be there. It is an internals
issue where it really lives. 

So if socket() is removed from the core (the executable). Perl upon
noticing a socket() without a user specified use that might override
it. Will transparently make it available along with all the associated
constants.

If a performance hit arises, then -internals will address the issue. But
nothing in the language will change.

I made the suggestino a while back, that if this is true for core. It
might be feasible for non-core modules (assuming some sort of registry)
so that an implicit use might be performed. 

(I'm ignoring the problems of multiple versions or multiple conflicting
 routines of the same name.)

Are we still far apart?

<chaim>
-- 
Chaim Frenkel                                        Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                               +1-718-236-0183