perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geoffrey Young <>
Subject Re: [mp2] Report on mp2 accessors in
Date Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:29:18 GMT

Stas Bekman wrote:
> Thanks for making the mp1 vs mp2 API get/set comparison and the patch,
> Fred. Your original version is now mostly integrated in various commits.
> I'm not quite agreeing with Philippe and Geoff. Blindly opening up
> fields, which have no special ap_ accessors for them is probably a good
> recipe into getting in troubles. I know Geoff's favorite phrase is "give
> them the feature and they will find the use for it". In this particular
> case, I'd suggest to be more cautious and leave things readonly until
> someone will ask to open up the accessor(s) to be settable. 

looks like it was more than a suggestion, since you went ahead and committed
the changes despite the comments from philippe and I.

> If you think some method should be settable, come up with an example
> where it'll be useful, 

I believe we did that in all cases where we wanted to maintain writability.

> It doesn't
> take more than 1 second to open it up.

> make it a test and see if it works, then open it
> up. I know we have quite a few methods whose settable functionality is
> not tested, but it really should.

these both go to the point we have discussed before, and which I thought we
had agreed upon, namely that 2.0 should be API freeze for documented and
tested methods, but that we would allow untested methods/functionalities in
under the caveat that the interface may change or completely go away.  isn't
that what we had agreed upon?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message