On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suspect that the amount of time saved by any benefits from
> standardized version numbers will be dwarfed by the amount of time
> spent arguing over what the standard should be.
We can kill two birds with one stone by argui
On 9/9/07 12:54 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Jonathan Swartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-09-08 12:15]:
>> On Sep 7, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Bill Ward wrote:
>>> "Abstract" has two meanings, so I think that could be
>>> confusing. I think Log::Any is better.
>>>
>> Ok, noted. The ::Abstract suffix does ha
On 9/8/07 7:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How about this:
>
> use Log::Abstract qw($log $log_is_debug);
>
> $log->debug(...) if $log_is_debug;
>
> which translates to something like
>
> use Log::Abstract;
> my $log = Log::Abstract->get_logger
> (category => __PACKAGE
On 9/6/07 4:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So why do CPAN modules eschew the use of these and invent their
> own mechanisms that are almost guaranteed to be less powerful?
I agree with all your listed reason, but I think you missed one: minimum
overhead. Ideally, logging would disappear entire
On 11/18/05, Randy Kobes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What looks like is happening is that search.cpan.org
> (sometimes) converts links in the docs into things
> of the form
> http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?Module::Name
> This seems to work if Module::Name is a registered name
> (eg, a query in
On 11/17/05 11:08 PM, Ken Williams wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2005, at 7:16 PM, John Siracusa wrote:
>> How do I link to a POD document form within my POD in such a way that
>> search.cpan.org will make the correct link? I tried doing this:
>>
>> L
>>
>>
How do I link to a POD document form within my POD in such a way that
search.cpan.org will make the correct link? I tried doing this:
L
to link to My/Foo.pod in my module, but that doesn't work. OTOH, that
syntax seems to work fine in some other modules I see on CPAN. What am I
doing wrong
On 10/6/05, Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it looks like Rose::URI does what I want
Really? I thought you wanted a factory that produced URI(.pm) objects
specifically? Well, anyway, I added a way to set the default query param
separator last night (0.021), which you might find handy
On 10/5/05, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You offered up Rose::URI for Dave to use independently of the
> Rose module suite.
>
> I said that if Rose::URI is *meant* to serve such a purpose, then
> its name is bad.
But what if it "can be" used to serve such a purpose? That fact that p
On 10/5/05, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe leave the name alone but change the abstract?
>
> "A URI object built for easy and efficient manipulation" may be
> true but it doesn't tell us: manipulation of what, by what, nor
> that it is compatible with the URI in many ways. Perhap
On 10/5/05, Terrence Brannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1 - GENERIC functionality would go into URI::Factory. This is
> functionality which addresses the general problem domain in a general
> way with no obvious leanings towards any particular framework.
Well, Rose::URI isn't a factory for URI o
On 10/5/05, Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, John Siracusa wrote:
>> If Dave searched for "URI" or "URI from hash" he'd have seen Rose::URI on
>> the first results page:
>
> I did do such a search, but I ignore Rose::
On 10/5/05, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes the combined ::Object + ::DateTime package would have no
> dependencies on any other Rose::* modules, so could be useful
> outside those.
I think it'd be pretty odd to combine DateTime utility class with an object
base class.
> If you wa
On 10/5/05, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think if I keep this up I¹ll end up proposing actually
> descriptive names all over the map for where Rose::* stuff could
> have been placed. I think I¹ll instead stop here and continue to
> consider Rose::* an ignorable walled garden whose us
On 10/5/05 8:40 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-10-05 14:31]:
>> This is pretty close to what you want already:
>>
>> http://search.cpan.org/dist/Rose-URI/lib/Rose/URI.pm
>
> Which demonstrates why cutesy names are a bad, *ba
On 10/5/05 3:21 AM, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Xavier Noria wrote:
>> Wouldn't you expect such a constructor in URI.pm itself, what about a patch?
>> Maybe it is not there already by design though.
>
> A couple things:
>
> - This module probably won't support _all_ types of URIs, at
On 6/30/05 4:37 AM, Robert Rothenberg wrote:
> CPAN Testers now has a tests by author link as well:
>http://testers.cpan.org/author/[authorid].html
> as in
>http://testers.cpan.org/author/KWILLIAMS.html
Speaking of which, what's up with stuff like this:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl
On 4/24/05 5:12 PM, Smylers wrote:
> John Siracusa writes:
>> The first is my object/relational database mapper thingie. ... The
>> second is an object-oriented interface to HTML, with a focus on HTML
>> forms and fields. I developed this one because there was nothing like
On 4/24/05 11:34 AM, Andy Lester wrote:
> Your first goal will be explaining in 25 words or fewer why your
> mapper thing is better than Class::DBI. When you have a module space
> as overloaded as that, you've got to do some marketing. Don't expect
> that you'll put your module out there, set up
On 4/24/05 10:56 AM, Andy Lester wrote:
> It would be a lot easier to help you if we knew the specifics of the
> modules you're talking about.
Well I was really trying to keep the question more general, but I can give
you two specific examples.
The first is my object/relational database mapper th
What's the best way to spread the word about a new module? I've got a few
modules that I think a lot of people would find useful. They're still in
active development (pre-1.0) but I'd like as many people as possible to try
them so I can get feedback from the community. How do I spread the word
a
On 4/21/05 6:57 PM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-21 21:30]:
>> You don't already check the return value of every system call?
>
> Yes. But I never check close() (actually, I omit the explicit
> close() and let scoping on lexical filehandles clean things up)
> w
On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:21:35 +1300, Sam Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that this information should be removed from most programs
> altogether. They should just have to specify a logical data source
> (possibly including a schema version), then a module with a config file
> maps that
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:58:56 +0100, Henrik Tougaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ingres, like Informix and (I think) Oracle, does'nt have the concept
> of 'host' or 'port', using other ways of adressing remote databases.
So? AFAICT, what we've been talking about is simply a list of name/value
pair
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:39:00 +, Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, the reason I'm digging here is because I agree there may be
> some value in the DBI supporting something along these lines, but
> I need a better understanding of the underlying issues. More real-
> world examples would
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:46:24 +, Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you generally pass URLs around as a string or broken up into a hash?
If they had different formats for different consumers, I would. (And even
today, I use my own URI objects when I know I'll have to do any significant
a
.com)
On 11/5/04 7:29 PM, Smylers wrote:
> John Siracusa writes:
>> * A set of DateTime utility functions
>> It's my intention to release the entire suite as a "branded" entity
>> much like Mason, Maypole, or Bricolage, with a unique top-level
>> namespace to
On 11/5/04 8:00 PM, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 12:29:23AM +, Smylers wrote:
>> Nonetheless I feel it would be worth doing this for anything completely
>> independent. It may be a little more hassle for you to release a few
>> separate distros rather than one -- but it would
I have a big collection of modules that are currently under the JCS::
namespace (my initials). Together, they are meant to form a sort of web
application construction kit. They're still under development, but I intend
to release them to CPAN eventually. I'm also considering releasing parts of
th
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:19:03 -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 09:52:16AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> > If module A uses module B, but module B also uses module A, what do I put in
> > PREREQ_PM? Will the CPAN shell be able to handle a circular depend
If module A uses module B, but module B also uses module A, what do I put in
PREREQ_PM? Will the CPAN shell be able to handle a circular dependency?
-John
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:50:37 -0500, Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was sort of hoping this idea would just die on its own, but now it
> looks like people are actually getting ready to do it. In my opinion
> this is a bad idea. I don't want a bunch of reviews all over CPAN
> disguisin
On 10/31/03 2:18 PM, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Sherzod Ruzmetov wrote:
>> The class builds/manipulates @ISA relationships of classes dynamically,
>> right? How about Class::DynamicISA then?
>
> This implies that it modifies @ISA. In fact, it _never_ modifies @ISA for
> the classes
On 10/15/02 3:55 PM, William R Ward wrote:
> For me, it's because TT allows Perl to be embedded in the template.
> That way lies madness. The advantage of a templating system is that
> you can leave the template maintenance to someone who doesn't know
> programming
Try asking someone who "doesn'
On 11/11/01 12:20 AM, Terrence Brannon wrote:
> 1 - no one will shoot you if you upload it. it seems like it might be called
> Class::Accessor::Lite or something like that
Well, I'm hesitant to get into the Class::Accessor namespace without being
part of the Class::Accessor project. Since my lit
On 11/10/01 9:22 PM, Terrence Brannon wrote:
> Class::MakeMethods sports an extensible architecture. Your desired
> style of object creation and initialization can be plugged into his
> architecture and contributed:
>
> http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/data/Class-MakeMethods/MakeMethods.html
Wo
On 11/10/01 4:47 PM, Ade Olonoh wrote:
>> My base class does almost nothing. It requires hash-based objects; it
>> provides very loose conventions for cascading initialization; and it
>> auto-creates simple scalar accessors via AUTOLOAD.
>
> See Class::Accessor (http://search.cpan.org/search?dis
Over the past few years, I've been carrying around (and/or re-writing from
scratch) a very simple object base class that I like to use in my work. I
never though to upload it to CPAN since I figured there must already be
something similar. Well, I've started looking and I can't find anything
tha
38 matches
Mail list logo
