3 ms·
except is it? are most 0.1 module 'maintainers' responsible to the OP for high code quality, impeccable documentation and ease of integration? If this post is
by nsfmc 14y ago
except is it? are most 0.1 module 'maintainers' responsible to the OP for high code quality, impeccable documentation and ease of integration?
If this post is a language gripe, then at least argue about language peculiarities, not the quality of the open source community's efforts. I would rather read a post arguing that the dream of py3k's never materialize (with examples) than a screed directed towards open source devs that just aren't doing enough.
- Mithaldu 14y agoLet me quote Matt S. Trout: "UNIX is my IDE. perl5 is my VM. CPAN is my language." This kind of thinking pervades the Perl community and as such people in it look at other languages taking into account their entire eco system and community. Way too many people seem to think that the turing completeness of a language is all it needs and that all the things surrounding the language are irrelevant, while they in reality often affect massively how quickly something can be implemented. > are most 0.1 module 'maintainers' responsible to the OP for high code quality, impeccable documentation and ease of integration? Also, well, yes. On CPAN that is the general feeling. To give an example, here's a module i released, which i never needed to modify beyond the first release and which does a minimal task. Yet it has full docs: https://metacpan.org/module/Win32::Detached https://metacpan.org/module/Win32::Detached