On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 01:38, David Manura wrote:
> Unfortunately, there seems to be no clean and easy way now to assert that one's
> code is compatible with both 1.95 and 1.96 and to work with both versions.
> However, this may do:
>
> use Text::Balanced 1.95_and_1.96; # ok
>
> The above is accidentally accepted by 1.95, and 1.96 could interpret it
> specially upon overriding import().
BEGIN{
my $err1;
eval 'use Text::Balanced 1.96';
$@ and do {
$err1 = $@;
eval 'use Text::Balanced 1.95';
$@ and die <<EOERR;
tried to use Text::Balanced 1.96 and got
$err1
tried to use Text::Balanced 1.95 and got
$@
EOERR
}
}
>
> Would this solution hold in general when breaking module interfaces?
Yep, but it's ugly as hell.
In the situation where you want to have two different behaviors from the
same-named module, different versions, used in different packages in
the same program, a way to do that might be to choose a named package
variable (such as ${caller()."::Text::Balanced::Version"} ) and
assign to it within the VERSION subroutine
${caller()."::Text::Balanced::Version"} = $req_ver
then when there's a choice to zag or zig, that's where you go for a
hint. (I have verified that caller() is available within &VERSION.)
--
david nicol
this message was sent from a filtering e-mail address.
your reply must include a listed "magic phrase" such as "perl"
