(..) though I might change it as the Package::Names::Are::Getting::Way::Too::Long.
There are two tricks I'm sometimes using with long package names: (works with OO packages only)
- global namespace aliasing. Just do:
*Foo::= *AxKit::App::Foo::;
albeit that's something with global effect to the whole program, so the problem of choosing a non-conflicting short namespace is just moved from the author to the user of the package.
- lexical "aliasing": my $Foo= "AxKit::App::Foo"; my $foo= new $Foo; # see also http://pflanze.mine.nu/~chris/scripts/extlib/Chj/load.pm
At 17:56 Uhr -0500 09.12.2004, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
Unltimately, I think I'm going to apply for Business::Commerce. Plain ole Commerce would be nice to keep the modules names short, but it does seem to fit well into Business:: for a set generic commerce building blocks.
I'm wondering if you really need to put multiple modules into such a namespace. If you split your functionality into independent chunks, you might find that most of your modules don't have anything to do with Business:: at all.
Christian.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
