On Dec 2, 2005, at 4:20 PM, Austin Schutz wrote:
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 04:04:11PM -0600, Chris Dolan wrote:
The FF:: namespace is a terrible idea, in my opinion. I expect that
it will be meaningless to the majority of module searchers. The
argument that search makes names irrelevant is just silly.
..because?
Ok, I want to do something with my flash file. I search for
'flash file'... Oh look, there's a flash file parser. Do I care
what it's
called? No. I concur that the module name is effectively
meaningless, but I
don't see that it makes any difference to the searcher.
Nitpick: FLV is not Flash. FLV is a video format that is often used
by Flash movies, but it is not Flash and does not work standalone
without a Flash movie to control it. SWF is the file format for
Flash movies.
It's marginally helpful to have a useful name when including it
in a module so code doesn't look like $flv = new
ASDFsdafs::sjhsdlk, but
beyond that, what tangible and practical difference does it make?
You assume that all authors discover modules solely through
search.cpan.org? I often discover modules by reading other people's
code and seeing what modules they use. If I see "use FF::FOOBAR" at
the top of someone's module, I will have no idea what they are trying
to do. But if I see, say "FileFormat::Video::FOOBAR" then at least I
will know the author is trying to interact with a stream of video data.
To me, it's as much about readable code as it is about findable modules.
If that
were true, the practice of bouncing name ideas off this email list
would cease, and I'd just name it FLV.pm.
As I understand it there's some rationale for keeping the top
level
namespace small, so that would probably not be a good choice.
Beyond that,
name it what you will.
I submit these long threads about which module name is better than
some other similar name are a waste of time, and I do indeed suggest
we take them off list as a general rule.
Austin
I strongly disagree. I think good naming is important for
readability and maintainability. Like good variable and method
names, module names should be self-documenting whenever feasible.
Since module names are harder to change than variable or method
names, I say a little forethought and discussion is justified.
Chris
--
Chris Dolan, Software Developer, Clotho Advanced Media Inc.
608-294-7900, fax 294-7025, 1435 E Main St, Madison WI 53703
vCard: http://www.chrisdolan.net/ChrisDolan.vcf
Clotho Advanced Media, Inc. - Creators of MediaLandscape Software
(http://www.media-landscape.com/) and partners in the revolutionary
Croquet project (http://www.opencroquet.org/)
