Michael G Schwern wrote:
> RFC 142 may help out existing un/pack users, but does nothing to help
> in the understanding of un/pack by native speakers of Perl.
>
> I'm starting to think this is largely a documentation issue.
The existing documentation of pack/unpack is terse, and assumes a knowle
Michael G Schwern writes:
> RFC 142 may help out existing un/pack users, but does nothing to help
> in the understanding of un/pack by native speakers of Perl.
>
> I'm starting to think this is largely a documentation issue.
Yes. Please put this thread out of our collective misery.
Nat
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 11:32:39AM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> > Its just damn unperlish. Perhaps that's in its nature, being that its
> > for converting data from things which are Perl, but we've got to be
> > able to do better.
> >
>
> RFC 142 may not be perfect, but it results in similar f
Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> RFC 246: pack/unpack uncontrovercial enhancements
> RFC 247: pack/unpack C-like enhancements
>
> RFC 248: enhanced groups in pack/unpack
>
> RFC 249: Use pack/unpack for marshalling
>
> RFC 250: hooks in pack/unpack
>
> The following enhancement covers almost all the
