Kirrily 'Skud' Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] said:
>
> My main purpose with perlmodstyle was to give us a starting
> point for a Perl 6 style guide, in time for the Great Rewrite
> that's likely to happen with most of CPAN.
>
I have some raw material that may be useful (and I do mean raw).
O
In perl.perl6.stdlib, you wrote:
>
>Something like perlstyle and perlmodstyle for perl 5 then?
My main purpose with perlmodstyle was to give us a starting point for a
Perl 6 style guide, in time for the Great Rewrite that's likely to
happen with most of CPAN.
K.
--
Kirrily 'Skud' Robert - [EM
On 8/25/01 1:51 PM, Kirrily Robert wrote:
> In perl.perl6.stdlib, you wrote:
>> Er, okay, well scratch that example then :) But my point still stands: I
>> think Perl 6 should have some sort of guidelines in this area, even if
>> they're only a codification of what "the majority" of Perl authors
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 09:40:05AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> On 8/25/01 5:12 AM, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> If you ask any Java programmer which is "correct", myJavaMethod() or
> >> My_Java_Method(), I think you'll get a straight answer.
> >
> > Fr
In perl.perl6.stdlib, you wrote:
>
>Er, okay, well scratch that example then :) But my point still stands: I
>think Perl 6 should have some sort of guidelines in this area, even if
>they're only a codification of what "the majority" of Perl authors do.
Yes. See also "perldoc perlstyle" and the
On 8/25/01 5:12 AM, Johan Vromans wrote:
> John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If you ask any Java programmer which is "correct", myJavaMethod() or
>> My_Java_Method(), I think you'll get a straight answer.
>
> From experience I can assure you this is not the case. There are a
> couple o
John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you ask any Java programmer which is "correct", myJavaMethod() or
> My_Java_Method(), I think you'll get a straight answer.
>From experience I can assure you this is not the case. There are a
couple of (independent and mutual inconsistent) style gui
On 8/24/01 11:52 PM, John Siracusa wrote:
> I mentioned this on another list, and I thought I'd bring it up here as
> well. I think NeXT-style "bundles" offer an interesting solution for
> keeping several versions of a single library installed at the same time,
> with well-defined major/minor ver
I just subscribed, so forgive me if this has been covered before (I haven't
read all of the archives yet)
STYLE:
> There should be tools, guidelines and processes to assist authors in writing
> quality modules. See also [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Specifically:
> Style guide
> Naming guidelines
I kno
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> This is very similar to what Params::Validate does right now; in fact,
> the module could well inherit from it.
That'd be tricky since its not OO but you could build on it.
Alternately, I'd be happy to add more features to Params::Validate (I
don't feel
Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> I think you misunderstand. This isn't named parameters vs prototyped
> parameters vs args as list. The problem is the idea that functions
> should accept *multiple styles by default* which the proposed
> Module::Interface does.
No, it doesn't. Unfortunately, I used
From: Michael G Schwern [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:55:37AM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > > There should be ONE calling style for each sub/method.
> > > Allowing this _will_ cause different people to use different
> > > calling styles and also possible confusion.
>
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:55:37AM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > There should be ONE calling style for each sub/method.
> > Allowing this _will_ cause different people to use different
> > calling styles and also possible confusion.
>
> It gives us a cleaner way to mix and match order dependa
From: Graham Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 04:38:43PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > And allow flexible calling styles. For example, you might say:
> >
> ># import args() for argument validation
> >use Module::Interface qw/args/;
> >
> >sub my_func (@) {
>
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 10:02:29AM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 09:46:13AM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >
> > > Remember, the goal for Perl 6 is to allow several modules sharing
> > > the same name.
> >
> > D
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 10:45:27AM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 07:20:11PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 02:16:49PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > One silliness is that the implementation "style" of the module
> > > seems to creep to the
Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > (1) Foo vs Foo_XS
>
> Why do they need to be named differently ? Only one will be installed.
That is only possible if they have _identical_ APIs.
-- Johan
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 04:38:43PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> And allow flexible calling styles. For example, you might say:
>
># import args() for argument validation
>use Module::Interface qw/args/;
>
>sub my_func (@) {
>my %args = args({ positional => [qw/name email phon
Kirrily Robert wrote:
>
> 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
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 deve
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 02:31:47PM -0400, Kirrily Robert wrote:
> Ask wrote:
> >On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Kirrily Robert wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >> =head2 The role of CPAN
> >>
> >> Will CPAN's role remain unchanged? Will there be a separate space for
> >> Perl 6 modules (6PAN)?
> >>
> >> If we do want t
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 03:51:22PM -0400, Kirrily Robert wrote:
> [ moving to perl6-stdlib only; -meta doesn't need this. ]
>
> Jarkko wrote:
> >> Sys:: should be declared redundant and silly. Sys::Syslog simply
> >> hurts my teeth.
> >
> >Text:: is another silliness, though from for slightly di
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 07:20:11PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 02:16:49PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > One silliness is that the implementation "style" of the module
> > seems to creep to the naming:
> >
> > (1) Foo vs Foo_XS
>
> Well then, how do you name it
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 09:46:13AM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> > Remember, the goal for Perl 6 is to allow several modules sharing
> > the same name.
>
> Don't you mean several modules sharing a common named interface?
For now, module
From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Remember, the goal for Perl 6 is to allow several modules sharing
> the same name.
Don't you mean several modules sharing a common named interface?
Or are you refering to module, version, and author? Or something else?
25 matches
Mail list logo
