Hildo Biersma wrote:
> > > I think such modules are a bad idea, because their functionality is
> > > typically restricted.
>
> An example of this is the CGI module.
You consider CGI.pm an example of a module with restricted functionality?
> IMHO, mixing procedural and OO interfaces to the same module is a bad
> idea. Promoting it in the language is not wise.
O.k., but that's not the same as disallowing it. Perl is not a B&D
language.
> > altering *anything* about Perl to make
> > something easier is quite in keeping with Perl's philosophy.
>
> Perl should not make bad design or bad practice easier. That's why we
> are looking at adding more (though optional) strict-ness, type checking,
> compile-time safety, etc.
Well, the current situation is suboptimal. Either we should add a
warning for "mixed module paradigms", or make it easier to write
mixed-paradigm modules.
> But hey, I know this is a religious issue. I'll be able to live with
> Larry's final decision...
Me too.
--
John Porter
We're building the house of the future together.
