> > Other module names I considered were Data::Streamer
> > Data::Dumper::Streamer and Data::Serialize and also preserving the
> > BFDump name. After discussions with various people from Perlmonks
> > the consensus was that Data::Stream was the preferred choice.
>
> A "Data::Stream" could be just about anything. Doesn't say what it does.
>
> Although "stream" is _how_ it does it, "dump" is what it actually does.
> So it should have dump in the name along with stream.
> I'd suggest:
>
> Data::StreamDump
Well, I guess, although im unconvinced. It seems to me that Data::Stream by
itself conveys serialization, which is all that dumping is. The fact that it
suggests IO Streams is just a nice coincidental byproduct.
I suppose Im also a little adverse to names like this just because of the
wise guy factor "What, it takes a dump in a stream?" . Maybe that isnt a
particularly relevent but still. (I encountered this already with BFDump and
im a little keen to avoid it this time round. Names are important :-)
Here are my personal criteria for a name for the module:
1. it avoids wise guy names.
2. its short enough that its not a PITA for -M usage.
3. its in the Data:: name space.
4. Id like it to denote that it streams (as in writes to a stream)
5. Id like it to denote that it serializes
6. Id like it to leave room so that it allows for formats other than perl.
So I was thinking
Data::Stream
for the current release, with it being a wrapper into
Data::Stream::Perl
Data::Stream::XML
Data::Stream::YAML
Data::Stream::Binary
or whatever once I have other versions.
Anyway, i'm interested to see if you still stand by your view or if you
have alternate suggestions based on the above. Im not totally sold on
Data::Stream, but so far its the best of what ive seen and heard.
Cheers,
Yves
