Do you mean Parse::Method::Signatures ?
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 10:54 PM, breno oainikus...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Bill Ward b...@wards.net wrote:
Params::Validate has the right features, but I really don't like the
verbosity of its configuration. I was hoping
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Bill Ward b...@wards.net wrote:
Do you mean Parse::Method::Signatures ?
No, I mean http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?Method::Signatures
http://www.slideshare.net/schwern/methodsignatures-presentation
I haven't looked at it much, but it seems to fill most of your
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:48 PM, breno oainikus...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Bill Ward b...@wards.net wrote:
Do you mean Parse::Method::Signatures ?
No, I mean http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?Method::Signatures
You seem to hate everything. I am confused as to why people even waste
their time trying to help you.
* On Wed, May 06 2009, Bill Ward wrote:
1. Same problem as Moose - it changes the language too much for my
taste. I don't see what all the fuss is about declaring $self.
Most people want to
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Jonathan Rockway j...@jrock.us wrote:
You seem to hate everything. I am confused as to why people even waste
their time trying to help you.
[snip]
Anyway, embrace modules. They are the reason to use Perl.
I think Bill gets Perl. (c.f.
On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 11:58:47AM -0700, Jonathan Leto wrote:
[how to compare floating point numbers in tests]
Check that it's in an acceptable range.
I heartily agree with this. Math::GSL has thousands of tests like
this, which is why Math::GSL::Test
has a number of easy-to-use functions
On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 03:05:49PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
Yikes. You must have missed Test::Number::Delta ...
Harr! That'll teach me to read the whole thread before replying!
--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive
Irregular English:
you have anecdotes; they
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 07:10:49AM -0400, David Golden wrote:
I don't think he deserves public scorn in response to a reasonable
question and reasonable objections to suggestions.
I agree about the public scorn, but I disagree that Perl 5's OO is fine is
reasonable. It's horrible; we just all
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Hans Dieter Pearcey
hdp.perl.module-auth...@weftsoar.net wrote:
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 07:10:49AM -0400, David Golden wrote:
I don't think he deserves public scorn in response to a reasonable
question and reasonable objections to suggestions.
I agree about
Howdy,
Thanks guys for sticking up for me. I am just old-fashioned, I guess; for
better or for worse, I'm not interested in changing/fixing Perl itself, just
in finding writing reusable code that meets my needs without adding stuff
that doesn't.
Wow, I was taken aback when I read not
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Jonathan Leto jal...@gmail.com wrote:
Howdy,
Thanks guys for sticking up for me. I am just old-fashioned, I guess;
for
better or for worse, I'm not interested in changing/fixing Perl itself,
just
in finding writing reusable code that meets my needs
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 11:27:05AM -0700, Bill Ward wrote:
1. Not every module you're using will be Moose-based, so if you're working on
one of those, you'll need to remember to switch back and forth. It's bad
enough having both (Perl's approximation of) OO and procedural calls.
If you're
Howdy,
There are a couple of big problems with adopting Moose or one of the similar
redesigns of Perl OO.
You mean implementing OO in Perl, but I get it.
1. Not every module you're using will be Moose-based, so if you're working
on one of those, you'll need to remember to switch back and
On Tue, 5 May 2009 19:09:30 -0700
Bill Ward b...@wards.net wrote:
The way I've interpreted that in my own auto-build scripting is that if
Build.PL exists, the module author is probably a Module::Build user who is
only providing a Makefile.PL grudgingly for the sake of those who haven't
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Paul LeoNerd Evans
leon...@leonerd.org.ukwrote:
On Wed, 6 May 2009 11:27:05 -0700
Bill Ward b...@wards.net wrote:
(Perl's approximation of) OO
I've often seen this one bandied about, and I can't say I agree with it.
Neither do I, but I threw the
15 matches
Mail list logo
