Andy moved slurp_file() into Parrot::BuildUtil last month. So I don't
think we need to start a separate module called Parrot::Util -- at least
not yet.
I'm adding one file, t/configure/039-slurp_file.t, to provide unit tests
for Parrot::BuildUtil::slurp_file(). I also spruced up the POD in
Build
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Apparently the plan is to go in the opposite direction, i.e.,
getting that
>> stuff out of the Parrot distribution and into Bundle::Parrot on CPAN.
>
> How would the naming work there?
Not exactly certain what naming you're referring to ...
> I was trying to reduce
On 8/14/07, Joshua Hoblitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 07:11:36AM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
> > i started Bundle::Parrot to work towards the goal of removing all
> > external modules from the parrot repository. external modules don't
> > belong in the repository unless we nee
On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 07:11:36AM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
> i started Bundle::Parrot to work towards the goal of removing all
> external modules from the parrot repository. external modules don't
> belong in the repository unless we need to fork them from their CPAN
> version. unfortunately, this
On 8/14/07, James E Keenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Cochrane wrote:
> > On 14/08/07, Joshua Hoblitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Why not just pull Slurp or File::Slurp into the tree? Yes, writing a
> >> slurp function is trivial but (bare with me here) if it's non-trivial
> >> enough to
Paul Cochrane wrote:
On 14/08/07, Joshua Hoblitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why not just pull Slurp or File::Slurp into the tree? Yes, writing a
slurp function is trivial but (bare with me here) if it's non-trivial
enough to be factored out into a module then it should be non-trivial
enough to n
On 14/08/07, Joshua Hoblitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not just pull Slurp or File::Slurp into the tree? Yes, writing a
> slurp function is trivial but (bare with me here) if it's non-trivial
> enough to be factored out into a module then it should be non-trivial
> enough to not re-invent the
Why not just pull Slurp or File::Slurp into the tree? Yes, writing a
slurp function is trivial but (bare with me here) if it's non-trivial
enough to be factored out into a module then it should be non-trivial
enough to not re-invent the wheel.
-J
--
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 07:38:36AM -0700, Andy
Andy had filed 44607 this morning, but for some reason it didn't show up in my
newsreader
until after I had filed 44615. So whoever wants to work on
Parrot::YetToBeNamed should write
Parrot::Util instead.
# New Ticket Created by Andy Lester
# Please include the string: [perl #44607]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=44607 >
Pull slurp_file out of Parrot::Test into Parrot::Util. Then, remove
the cut'n'pasted c
10 matches
Mail list logo
