A. Pagaltzis writes:
* Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-02 22:10]:
Eric Wilhelm writes:
I'm working on CAD::DXF for now,
Cad is a well-known acronym. I have no use for anything
cad-related in my life at the moment, so I know that I can
safely ignore that module. But as it
Austin Schutz writes:
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.
* Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-03 09:20]:
But that's still grouping together all file-format-related
modules (under Process::), rather than grouping them by
function.
I was not being serious. :-)
Regards,
--
Aristotle
“If you can’t laugh at yourself, you don’t take life seriously
# from Daniel T. Staal
# on Friday 02 December 2005 12:59 pm:
It's better than the other examples, which doesn't mean it is good.
How about FileFormat:: ?
FileFormat::GBF - Front end to GBF read/write interface
FileFormat::GBF::Parser
...
Ok, but it's just SoooLoonng.
I think Austin has a
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 08:30:20AM +, Smylers wrote:
There are several places where somebody could first encounter a module
name:
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?
A
* Eric Wilhelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-03 11:05]:
I tend to detest the long names that too much discussion about
hierarchy has forced on us...
use My::Really::Long::Module::Name;
my $obj = My::Really::Long::Module::Name-new();
... is just _almost_ tedious enough to warrant
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 07:32:04PM -0800, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
It's better than the other examples, which doesn't mean it is good.
How about FileFormat:: ?
FileFormat::GBF - Front end to GBF read/write interface
FileFormat::GBF::Parser
...
Ok, but it's just SoooLoonng.
I think Austin
Austin Schutz writes:
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 08:30:20AM +, Smylers wrote:
[Austin wrote:]
Do I care what it's called?
A large search results listing is one such place. You want to be able
to pick out the potentially useful modules from the list, so having
their names be
Eric Wilhelm writes:
use My::Really::Long::Module::Name;
my $obj = My::Really::Long::Module::Name-new();
... is just _almost_ tedious enough to warrant copy/paste, but not
quite.
A decent editor should provide some sort of completion facility on
previously typed terms, so that you
* Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-03 12:45]:
I believe that Emacs has an equivalent feature
Yeah, that camp calls it hippie-expand – don’t ask.
and I'm sure I've seen some kind of tooltip completion feature
on a gui Windows editor.
That’s common.
Eclipse also offers “word completion,”
# from A. Pagaltzis
# on Friday 02 December 2005 02:45 pm:
Process::video::x_flv
Process::application::x_shockwave_flash
Process::image::x_dxf
Process::audio::mpeg
Process::image::png
Process::text::html
That's great! Problem solved.
I'm pleased to announce the upload of a new CPAN release 1.80. Thanks
to all involved people, especially those who didn't make it into the
releasenotes. I hope you have the appropriate amount of fun or a least
not too many annoying encounters with it. Thank you.
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
--- Austin Schutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, you and a few other vocal people have very strong opinions
about this, which I don't begrudge you. Can we move the
discussions to a different list?
While I certainly agree that long discussions about how to name modules
get tedious after a
# from Ovid
# on Saturday 03 December 2005 12:22 pm:
Then that conversation would legitimately jump back here and
would eventually jump to the naming list ... over and over again.
That would be even more tedious (hard to believe, I know).
And eventually everyone in the thread (except the list,
# from Smylers
# on Saturday 03 December 2005 03:41 am:
That sounds tedious when written down like this, but basically it just
involves holding down Ctrl and pressing P and X a few times.
Neat. My vim does it all at once if the syntax mode is perl :-)
That said, I would much rather see all
Eric Wilhelm writes:
# from Smylers
# on Saturday 03 December 2005 03:41 am:
That sounds tedious when written down like this, but basically it
just involves holding down Ctrl and pressing P and X a few times.
Neat. My vim does it all at once if the syntax mode is perl :-)
Ah, so it
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 12:22:16PM -0800, Ovid wrote:
--- Austin Schutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, you and a few other vocal people have very strong opinions
about this, which I don't begrudge you. Can we move the
discussions to a different list?
While I certainly agree that long
18 matches
Mail list logo
