Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl: the Markov chain saw
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: The future of Perl?

by Jenda (Abbot)
on Nov 11, 2014 at 16:44 UTC ( #1106849=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: The future of Perl?
in thread The future of Perl?

It might be better with Unicode, but actually the last time I wanted to use it I had to go elsewhere due to its lack of support for Unicode filenames under Windows. Maybe the situation is better now, but I'm not talking about a distant past. Directory operations and Unicode

I don't know what's the status now, nor do I give a flying rat's ass about what the heck is the situation under various flavours of Unix, but why would I use something if I can't even get it to open files?

Jenda
Enoch was right!
Enjoy the last years of Rome.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: The future of Perl?
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 11, 2014 at 18:21 UTC

    And I share exactly the same level of concern for your platform as you do for mine. :P Kidding! I care about the overall Perl ecosphere.

    This is actually awful. Have other high-level languages dealt with it correctly/well?

      There's plenty of places in Perl, where the built-ins were modeled to fit Unix. There's plenty of core modules designed to fit Unix. Porting of both to other operating systems often requires complicated hacks and emulations. Whenever there's something that works (a certain way) under Unix, it get's added and others have to bend over backwards to at least emulate it. When, on the other hand, there is anything other operating system specific, it has to be implemented as module with that OS in the name even if there were several "other" systems supporting that in a similar enough way.

      In this particular case Windows has had UTF-16 filesystem for years, but as "On Linux, file names are zero-byte terminated binary strings, the interpretation is left to the userland. One can guess based on the locale, or just assume something globally, but neither approach is robust." nothing will ever be done with the core. It would be hard for the Unix-based ports. erm. Sorry, that's not a port, that's the base. Right?

      Would it be harder, more restricted or trickier than, say, the fork emulation? I doubt it.

      If it was easy under Linux, it would be done and others would find a way to emulate it, even if not 100% correctly, and the emulations would eventually improve. If it's hard under Linux, it doesn't happen.

      Jenda
      Enoch was right!
      Enjoy the last years of Rome.

        On Linux/Unix systems, handling of encodings at the file system level is also broken. The only difference is that there you can work-around it.
Re^4: The future of Perl?
by salva (Canon) on Nov 11, 2014 at 16:47 UTC
    still broken!

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1106849]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (2)
As of 2021-03-08 02:43 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    My favorite kind of desktop background is:











    Results (123 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?