Re: What about Perl autodie? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: What about Perl autodie?
Date
Msg-id 898467.1707372203@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: What about Perl autodie?  (John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: What about Perl autodie?
List pgsql-hackers
John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:52 PM Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No drawbacks. I've been using it heavily for many, many years. Came out in 5.10.1,
>> which should be available everywhere at this point (2009 was the year of release)

> We moved our minimum to 5.14 fairly recently, so we're good on that point.

Yeah, but only recently.  I'm a little worried about the value of this
change relative to the amount of code churn involved, and more to the
point I worry about the risk of future back-patches injecting bad code
into back branches that don't use autodie.

(Back-patching the use of autodie doesn't seem feasible, since before
v16 we supported perl 5.8.something.)

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sutou Kouhei
Date:
Subject: Re: meson: catalog/syscache_ids.h isn't installed
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix propagation of persistence to sequences in ALTER TABLE / ADD COLUMN