Fwd: I'm sorry
haski at sezampro.yu
Sun Feb 11 07:31:02 PST 2001
On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 05:14:28PM -0500, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
Not really, but anyway ...
> I'm very sorry for the confusion I produced. I did this ALFS.pm stuff
> and made some mistakes:
It's really not that bad. I'm sorry if my previous message(s) sounded a bit
"hard", it's just that when I first started the new code I got a lot of
errors, so I wasn't too happy about it. :)
> The strongest drawback of ALFS.pm is, that it seems to require
> perl 5.6. Another one is that it uses eval() heavily. I will
> do another rewrite, I think. In the meantime I suggest we switch
> back to alfs until ALFS.pm is more stable . What do you think?
It would be nice if we could make it work with some older perl versions,
at least 5.00503, since there are a lot of people still using it.
I don't know if it's necessary to do another rewrite though ? I'm sure we
could think of something. :) But if you decide to do it anyway, go ahead.
Just let us know, because I would like to start hacking the code again, so it
would be nice to know. :)
And let's not switch back to alfs (what ever that means ;).
The more we test the current code, the better.
> /me slaps himself with the how-to-develop-software-
Hope it's not a heavy one.
> But I tested ALFS.pm and used the latest code from cvs.
Looking forward working with you,
More information about the alfs-discuss