On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> i didn't find a namespace registration request for Curses::Application.
> submit one and i'll OK it.
I sent a submission request to the list a long time ago, and thought I had
been given the go-ahead. I only now have a semi-stable implementation.
> i saw the request for Parse::PlainConfig. this looks very similar to
> ConfigReader::Simple and some of the other config modules. i think
> you have reinvented at least part of the wheel, and if it belongs
> anywhere it should be with the other modules that do config file
> tasks.
This module was given a green light by the list as well. As I explained then,
this is an analogue to Parse::PerlConfig, except that this is human-readable.
The author of that module and I had worked together (at the same company) and
we had coded our applications to be able to use either system, as specified by
the user's preference.
I will point a few differences between my module and ConfigReader::Simple: my
module has no non-core dependencies, compared to a rather large list of
dependencies for ConfigReader::Simple. Furthermore, my module appears to
support more data types, programmer-defined key/value delimiters, and also
writes configuration hashes to files, preserving existing comments or adding
new ones. All while trying to keep the actual conf files as human-readable as
possible.
In short, as a companion to Parse::PerlConfig and a parser/generator, it makes
more sense IMHO to leave it where it is. Not to mention that I've already got
a substantial number of users using this module who would have to update a lot
of scripts if there was a name-space change.
--Arthur Corliss
Bolverk's Lair -- http://arthur.corlissfamily.org/
Digital Mages -- http://www.digitalmages.com/
"Live Free or Die, the Only Way to Live" -- NH State Motto
