On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 10:58:57PM -0500, Steve Simmons wrote: > > > Note that it may not be possible to satisfy conflicting requests. If > > > module C<A> and module C<B> demand two different versions of the same > > > module C<C>, the compiler should halt and state the module conflicts. > > > > Pardon me for sniping at a great RFC, but I already promised the CPAN > > workers that I'd make that last statement false. There's no reason in > > principle why two modules shouldn't be allowed to have their own view > > of reality. Just because you write Foo::bar in your module doesn't mean > > that Perl can't know which version of Foo:: you mean. Has anyone considered the problems associated with XS code, or whatever its replacement is? -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
- RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous use of multiple modul... Garrett Goebel
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous use of multi... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous use of m... Andreas J. Koenig
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous use ... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous ... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulan... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous ... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulaneous ... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and simulan... Paul Johnson
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and sim... Branden
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and... Paul Johnson
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and... Paul Johnson
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC on Coexistance and... David Grove