In perl.perl6.stdlib, you wrote:
>>
>> While we're at it, I think that ExtUtils:: really needs renaming.
>> Nobody talks about "Perl extensions", they talk about modules. Or
>> possibly just about Perl. I actually think the stuff in ExtUtils would
>> be better off in Devel:: with the other developer tools.
>
>While you are at it you should consider redoing the APIs etc. so that they
>match. ie some consistency between method names and variable names, calling
>conventions etc...
>
>Also the PODs should be all written in the same style.
Yes, yes and yes.
>Very early on in the perl6 process I did some analysis of the current
>standard library and it is surprising how inconsistent it is.
Did you write anything down, and if so, can I have a copy please?
I've browsed through it but not written anything much.
>IMO with a more consistent library more companies are likely to give
>perl a closer look. The way things are now I think perl suffers because
>it does not present itself as a single product, but an app with a lot
>of libraries thrown around it.
Yup.
I also think there's too much overhead in learning (and remembering)
each library's quirks. My most common mistakes when using CPAN or core
modules occur when the modules have inconsistent interfaces and I forget
which ones take hashes and which take hashrefs, etc. Sure a quick RTFM
sorts it out, but it's still annoying.
K.
--
Kirrily 'Skud' Robert - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://infotrope.net/
"What I really need to put on the deed poll form is
[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
-- Morgan (from the Netizen quotes file)
