Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
* Ian Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-25 16:35]:
I have considered chained, and would be prepared to re-write
the existing controllers. A bigger decision would be renaming
the controllers or moving them.
e.g. existing MyApp::Controller::Foo::Bar maps to URI /foo/bar
To match against /<lang>/foo/bar either I can leave the
controller where it is (lib/MyApp/Controller/Foo/Bar.pm) or
move it (lib/MyApp/Controller/Lang/Foo/Bar)
The first approach is less work (only using chained) the second
is more work, but maps the URI namespace more logically to the
Class names.
What would people do if they were writing a Catalyst App from
scratch with this feature? That would tell me what the 'best
practice' is even if it means a big re-write exercise.
I use Chained exclusively and don’t use the Perl package
namespace as a mapping to the URI namespace at all, only
for logically grouping related functionality. Usually the
two still correspond to some extent of course, but I don’t
feel any need to force a correspondence.
I have considered that, but felt that with several developers a 'hard
rule' which mapped the
Perl package namespace to URI namespace avoided potential chaos.
I may reconsider in light of your comment. Would you care to give an
example of
where you would choose *not* to map one-to-one?
Regards,
_______________________________________________
List: [email protected]
Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
