If my understanding is correct and these are only for built-in types,
how about Types::BuiltIn or Types::Perl (cf Types::Numbers and
Types::CLike)?
While I'm at it, I think "P" is OK as an export, but I think even
"IO::P" would have been a more descriptive module name and perhaps more
likely to be found.
- Brian
On 2013-11-13 18:46, David Mertens wrote:
Linda -
I think that you got feedback that you did not even ask for: a clear
response from the module-authors community to not name your module
Types. Might I suggest Types::LAW. Obviously, LAW are your initials,
but it also lets you brag about laying down the LAW for type
constraints. :-)
David
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagalt...@gmx.de
<mailto:pagalt...@gmx.de>> wrote:
* Linda A. Walsh <perl-didd...@tlinx.org
<mailto:perl-didd...@tlinx.org>> [2013-11-13 16:20]:
> Unclear as to problem: Tried to register 'Types', but says can't due
> to unrelated module.
And that didn’t make you stop and wonder, if you thought that this
other
author should not have claimed that namespace, that maybe the same
could
be thought of yourself by someone else?
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
--
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." -- Brian Kernighan
--
Brian Katzung, Kappa Computer Solutions, LLC
Software development and mixed operating system support
for business, education, and science
Phone: 847.412.0713 http://www.kappacs.com
