On 01/06/2014 07:18 AM, brian d foy wrote:
[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
In article <52c6cad1.5020...@faui2k3.org>, Moritz Lenz
<mor...@faui2k3.org> wrote:
> As far as PAUSE is concerned, the behaviour makes sense to me and is
> only not confusing if you don't think about how Perl treats undef.
Sorry, too many negations confuse me. Also from a Perl module author, I
kinda think that treating undef like Perl is the most intuitive appracah.
It's intuitive to Perl but not to library science or databases where
null and defined values are different.
and the use of 'undef' (vs. 'null') suggests Perlish semantics to me. YMMV.
> Is there a reason you don't want to give the module a version?
Yes.
Care to share what that is? I'm curious what the use patterns are for
that.
I don't see any reason to give the module(s) a version except for the
Module::Build+CPAN-Indexer toolchain issues.
It's not really something that can be reused independently from the rest
of the distribution, so I don't see the pint.
I'm also worried that if I give the rest of the modules in the
distribution separate versions, then I'll forget to maintain them, and
out-of-date version information is worse than none at all, IMHO.
Cheers,
Moritz
