Bill Catlan wrote:
Michael,
I like your solution to the namespace issue. In fact, I like it a lot!
The plugins could be brought in either in the user's app (for now) or at the config level by C::A (perhaps later).
Hopefully Cees and others agree!
Also, I think this would be enhanced by Lance Brown's technique as well:
I agree, it would still use that technique that Cees was using before. I hope everyone else likes it too 'cause I think it would be easy to implement, easy to use, intuitive, and it solves all of the problems we were talking about before and CGI::Application itself won't have to be altered. If eveyone likes it I would even take Cees existing C::A::P and make the changes unless he wants to do it himself.
you can create a C::A::MyBase package that pulls in your standard set of plugins and then inherit all your apps from that. :-) Minimal extra programmer step.
--[Lance]
Would that work? Would the plugin's accessor method be properly inherited by the child class?
I'm pretty sure that would still work. All methods in the base class should be visible inside the child class.
-- Michael Peters Developer Plus Three, LP
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
