Re: [Boston.pm] perl 5.10 memory leak?

Module upgrades may not be likely, but I was responding to the first
question which was:

"...I suspect there are better methods that won't break with a future
version of IO::All."

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Conor Walsh <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Ben Tilly <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The reason to call the original DESTROY is so that if a future version of
> > IO::All adds logic to the DESTROY, you will still run that new code.
>
> This is an excellent point, but it does not sound like surprise module
> upgrades are a likely problem in Duane's world.
>