John Peacock wrote: > Michael G Schwern wrote: >>> We do not want to support any random subclass of >>> version.pm - we only want to support true version.pm objects. >> This, too, strikes me as odd. Why not? > > Because the PAUSE indexer runs everything in a safe compartment, with a very > restrictive methodology, and every additional class of version objects would > have to be added manually. As I said, I would rather have implemented version > objects as a first class type, rather than as a class. I'm just trying to > keep > the abstraction as tight as possible.
Well, just because PAUSE isn't doing it quite right doesn't mean everyone else has to. If every piece of the build chain hard codes "version" then when it comes time to allow subclasses of it we'll have to fix every piece again. Go ahead and use isa() to check the class of the version object. Can't hurt.
