6 ms·
It is already modern. The Perl community has boldly remained committed to compatibility over chasing the shiny and breaking shit, unlike many others (coughphpco
by forgotmypw17 6y ago
It is already modern. The Perl community has boldly remained committed to compatibility over chasing the shiny and breaking shit, unlike many others (coughphpcough), which is why I chose Perl for a new project a couple years ago.
I don't WANT so-called modernization. I want my program to remain working without having to change. it
- klibertp 6y ago> I want my program to remain working without having to change. it Can't you bundle the interpreter, possibly stripped down and compiled as a static binary, along with your program? But yes, strict backward compatibility, while having many downsides, provides a lot of value, too. The trade-off is situation and project dependent, and it's good to have both kinds of platforms: ones solid as a rock and moving slowly, and ones moving fast and breaking things.
- jrsj 6y agoThis will work for awhile until you stop receiving security updates and have to adapt to breaking changes to do so.
- forgotmypw17 6y agoBundling the interpreter would interfere significantly with being able to download and run from source.
- bmn__ 6y agohttps://metacpan.org/pod/pp https://metacpan.org/pod/pp https://metacpan.org/pod/staticperl https://metacpan.org/pod/staticperl https://metacpan.org/pod/perlcc https://metacpan.org/pod/perlcc But that's the worst way to deploy a program.