--- Sam Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, this code reads very well: > > use module 'Foo::Bar' as 'Bar'; > use package 'Foo::Bar' as 'Bar';
'package' is a reserved word, so I won't use that. 'module' is worse than 'class' because 'class' at least let's us know that this pragma is only for OO modules. > And this does not read as well (at least, in English): > > use aka 'Foo::Bar' as 'Bar'; Yeah, I really don't like it. > My suggestion; > > use aliasing to 'Bar', 'Foo::Bar'; > > With the upside that "aliasing" also clearly states what the module > does. That fails because it makes the common case more difficult: use aliasing "Really::Long::Class:Name"; # or use aliasing "Really::Long::Class:Name", as => "CName"; However, I do like the name "aliasing.pm" Anyone else? It's not perfect, but the one that reads the most naturally "class", seems to not be favored by people. Cheers, Ovid ===== Silence is Evil http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/philosophy/decency.html Ovid http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=17000 Web Programming with Perl http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/
