Re: Naming advice for a templating module
* Dr Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-04 09:00]: On Fri, 03 Mar 2006, A. Pagaltzis wrote: I had been thinking of XML::SlickTemplate. :-) Or else I might go with XML::SimpleTemplate. They seem only a little less brand-namey than Xmplate, which I thought was a nice play on words at the time. They’re better than Xmplate in that they actually contain the word “Template,” but they’re not very descriptive, no. I’m not satisfied, but I’m still failing to come up with a truly satisfactory name. :-/ Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
Re: Naming advice for a templating module
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006, A. Pagaltzis wrote: * Dr Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-04 09:00]: On Fri, 03 Mar 2006, A. Pagaltzis wrote: I had been thinking of XML::SlickTemplate. :-) Or else I might go with XML::SimpleTemplate. They’re better than Xmplate in that they actually contain the word “Template,” but they’re not very descriptive, no. I’m not satisfied, but I’m still failing to come up with a truly satisfactory name. :-/ What about Template::XML? Except that it might be thought to be part of Template Toolkit. -- Dr Bean
Re: New Module Proposal - Math::Interval
Orton, Yves writes: Thus, having some math background one would identify Math::Interval::Arithmetic (or maybe more proper, Math::IntervalArithmetic) at a glance in a search for interval. Imo the former form should be heavily preferred over the latter. Math::Interval admits the possibility that there could be a wide range of modules related to intervals. Math::IntervalArithmetic Does not. I completely agree with you if all of these (perhaps theoretical) modules _are_ related to intervals, and intervals in the same sense of the word as each other. But if these modules are actually dealing with different concepts (I've only been skimming this thread -- I'm not really mathsy enough to understand it -- but I think that might be the case) that only co-incidentally share a name then actually there's nothing to be gained in grouping them together. Actually, quite the reverse: there's benefit in splitting them by name into their 2 concepts. So having Math::FooInterval and Math::BarInterval as name-spaces would work for me, for suitable values of Foo and Bar which help to disambiguate the words. But similarly, if one of the meanings of interval is in more common use such that it's the concept mathematicians tend to refer to by that name without any disambiguating adjectives then it also makes sense to have Math::Interval for that concept and Math::FooInterval (or Math::InvervalFoo) for t'other one. So I think Math::Interval::Arithmetic or Math::IntervalArithmetic could be better, depending on whether it's dealing with arithmetic on the same concept as Math::Interval deals with, or whether it's a different concept entirely. Not only that but CamelHump identifiers are considered to bad style in the eyes of much of the community. It is harder for a coder to enter style-heaven than it is to fit a CamelHump through the eye of the community? Smylers
Re: Naming advice for a templating module
A. Pagaltzis writes: * Dr Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-04 10:05]: What about Template::XML? Except that it might be thought to be part of Template Toolkit. Yeah, the Template:: TLNS is nominally reserved for the Template Toolkit like DBI:: is for the DBI, even though some people have put other modules in those namespaces. The difference is that DBI is a branded-type name, in that it didn't have any meaning as a word until the DBI module were created, so it's reasonable that it takes a namespace to itself. Whereas template is an ordinary generic English word which is useful to many modules, so it isn't as reasonable for one particular templating module to snaffle that entire top-level namespace from everybody else. Smylers
Re: New Module Proposal - Math::Interval
* Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-04 12:50]:
Orton, Yves writes:
Not only that but CamelHump identifiers are considered to bad
style in the eyes of much of the community.
It is harder for a coder to enter style-heaven than it is to fit
a CamelHump through the eye of the community?
++
Laughing,
--
#Aristotle
*AUTOLOAD=*_;sub _{s/(.*)::(.*)/print$2,(,$\/, )[defined wantarray]/e;$1};
Just-another-Perl-hacker;
Re: Why isn't CPANPLUS anywhere under CPAN's by-module directory
On Saturday 04 March 2006 22:47, Andreas J. Koenig wrote: On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 19:05:34 +0200, Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Please see the following Google search: http://xrl.us/kauu It shows that CPANPLUS is not anywhere under CPAN's by-module directory. This makes it harder to fetch its archive programatically. My question is: why? It seems that CPANPLUS has never gone through the procedure of namespace approval. I have done it on behalf of them now and after the nextupload (or reindex) it should appear in its own by-modules directory. Thanks! Thanks for the report, You're welcome. Regards, Shlomi Fish - Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage:http://www.shlomifish.org/ 95% of the programmers consider 95% of the code they did not write, in the bottom 5%.
Re: Why isn't CPANPLUS anywhere under CPAN's by-module directory
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 19:05:34 +0200, Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Please see the following Google search: http://xrl.us/kauu It shows that CPANPLUS is not anywhere under CPAN's by-module directory. This makes it harder to fetch its archive programatically. My question is: why? It seems that CPANPLUS has never gone through the procedure of namespace approval. I have done it on behalf of them now and after the nextupload (or reindex) it should appear in its own by-modules directory. Thanks for the report, -- andreas
