Re: relative.pm vs import.pm

2007-10-11 Thread Johan Vromans 
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 unless I read it wrong, it doesn't provide the feature relative.pm
 was written for in the first place, that is loading modules using
 names relative to the current one.

If I understand correctly, that would be

  use import __PACKAGE__;

-- Johan

Re: relative.pm vs import.pm

2007-10-11 Thread A. Pagaltzis 
* Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-10-11 12:10]:
 But this will load *all* the modules below the current one,
 which is not the same thing as loading a set of selected
 modules. Imagine doing this with Plagger ;)

Imagine trying to load all of Plagger’s modules by hand. ;--)

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/

Re: relative.pm vs import.pm

2007-10-11 Thread Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni 
A. Pagaltzis wrote:

 * Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-10-11 12:10]:
  But this will load *all* the modules below the current one,
  which is not the same thing as loading a set of selected
  modules. Imagine doing this with Plagger ;)

 Imagine trying to load all of Plagger's modules by hand. ;--)

Right, except I chose Plagger because this is typically a framework where
you only load a couple of modules from the gazillions available.

-- 
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni

Close the world, txEn eht nepO.