Ovid (publius_ovidius) wrote,

  • Mood:

Primarily for Perl Programmers

For LJ readers:

Note that because the use.perl journal appears to have a bug in it where it does not allow me to post a journal entry where comments are disallowed, I'm posting this here and linking to it from there. Most of you can feel free to ignore this.

For use.perl readers:

The role debate has now descended into profanity. I won't link to it. It's easy to find and if you saw it, you know it. I don't want to be part of a community where that's the type of discussion we have. If you want to do that, do it in your own journal. That's fine. Please don't do this here.


  • At various times during this discussion, I've said things that haven't been polite. I've not used profanity, but some comments have been rather pointed. I'm apologize to all involved. I don't want discussion to be like this and I'm at fault here.
  • Very specifically, at one point, I mischaracterized chromatic's position. I apologized then and I apologize again. It was an accident born of frustration, but it was still wrong.
  • Note that in every proposal on this topic I've written, an explicit design goal was to give the role consumer (not the role, the consumer) complete control. The role does not, in any way shape or form, dictate implementation or "mess over someone else's class" (a paraphrase of someone else's words). Obviously some people strongly disagree with this.
  • If you do not like qr/strict roles|source filters|automated tests|whatever/ -- don't use them.

The debate is not really over. Others will continue it. And I don't think anyone "won" this debate. Rather, I think a lot of people lost.

Tags: perl
Comments for this post were disabled by the author