Re: With the Macrame macro system, Perl may now be a Lisp.

2007-12-08 Thread David Cantrell
Guy Hulbert wrote: > I think you can count something as successful if it gets to 1.0 or if > the author says it works (i.e. if in v 0.17 he says that the next > version will be 1.0 but never actually does the final release then we > can count that as a success). You'd better not use Data::Compare

Re: With the Macrame macro system, Perl may now be a Lisp.

2007-12-08 Thread David Cantrell
Guy Hulbert wrote: > Because perl modules can install their own dependencies Out of the several TENS OF THOUSANDS of module installs that I've gone through, I've noticed very few which don't either: rely on CPAN.pm (or CPANPLUS) to install dependencies; or ask the user whether to install them

Re: With the Macrame macro system, Perl may now be a Lisp.

2007-12-08 Thread A. Pagaltzis
* Dr.Ruud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-08 13:50]: > "A. Pagaltzis" schreef: > > Most of the modules that give me the heebie jeebies just > > never took off; I never had to install IO::All or Spiffy, > > say. > > I love those, so I am unable to understand any objections. Nor do you need to. We ca

Re: With the Macrame macro system, Perl may now be a Lisp.

2007-12-08 Thread A. Pagaltzis
* Guy Hulbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-07 22:45]: > Academic thinking again. > > CGI is highly successful. It *was* highly successful. * Jenda Krynicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-12-08 02:25]: > If you live long enough you see every victory turn into defeat, > but that doesn't mean it was no

Re: Naming convention for thin wrappers around C lib.so ?

2007-12-08 Thread Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni
Tim Bunce wrote: If there's a libfoo.so and I want to create a perl module/distribution that's just a very thin wrapper around libfoo, what should I call it? LibFoo Lib::Foo Lib::foo Lib::libfoo libfoo SomeCategory::Libfoo ??? Following the "Category::Foo" scheme:

Re: With the Macrame macro system, Perl may now be a Lisp.

2007-12-08 Thread Dr.Ruud
"A. Pagaltzis" schreef: > Most of the modules that give me the heebie jeebies just never > took off; I never had to install IO::All or Spiffy, say. I love those, so I am unable to understand any objections. -- Affijn, Ruud "Gewoon is een tijger."

Re: Naming convention for thin wrappers around C lib.so ?

2007-12-08 Thread Eric Wilhelm
# from nadim khemir # on Saturday 08 December 2007 02:10: >Most people wrapping a library call it after what it does, hidding the > fact that an existing library is used as implementation. It sounds like Tim's "what it does" is to provide you with libfoo so other modules can link against that.

Re: Naming convention for thin wrappers around C lib.so ?

2007-12-08 Thread nadim khemir
On Thursday 06 December 2007 23:11, Tim Bunce wrote: > If there's a libfoo.so and I want to create a perl module/distribution > that's just a very thin wrapper around libfoo, what should I call it? > > LibFoo > Lib::Foo > Lib::foo > Lib::libfoo > libfoo > SomeCategory::Libfo