3 ms·
Are you suggesting that the Perl community didn't follow the strategy of a) making this mistake over and over for a decade b) finally realizing, in the course
by mechanical_fish 18y ago
Are you suggesting that the Perl community didn't follow the strategy of
a) making this mistake over and over for a decade
b) finally realizing, in the course of some blog posts or their equivalent, that they needed a library to fix it?
c) making that library?
Because here's what appears to be the Perl equivalent of this Ruby blog post, from 2005:
http://use.perl.org/comments.pl?cid=45240&sid=29890 http://use.perl.org/comments.pl?cid=45240&sid=29890
This post is promoting the Proc::UID library, which was apparently only a year old at the time and was not quite finished. The release on CPAN was marked "for testing and review purposes only. Please do not use in production code."
http://search.cpan.org/~pjf/Proc-UID-0.04/UID.pm http://search.cpan.org/~pjf/Proc-UID-0.04/UID.pm
The newer Privileges::Drop library, which you link to, dates back only to 2007.
Perl is more mature than Ruby. But perhaps only a few years more mature.
- jrockway 18y agoYes, the author of Proc::UID discussed his module in public. That's not what I'm talking about here, I'm talking about the Ruby community's general love for cut-n-paste instead of actual library writing. Anyway, compare planet perl and planet ruby some time. The Ruby posts are overwhelmingly "cut-n-paste this code" and the Perl posts are generally "here is a module I wrote". Different cultures.