One more vote for $self. My reasoning - I've inherited a few projects that use something other than $self, and each had decided it was smarter than sticking to the standard $self. Try to integrate those, and not constantly forget on which module you're currently working! And now, a bunch of that project is new, converted, or imported code using "$self", an awful lot is still using "$this" (they were php immigrants), and there's a few random places that try to type less and use something like "$c" or "$s".
If one wants to adopt a standard of using "$c" in place of "$self" across their own project, I have no problem with that - it's one of the great things about perl, more than one way to do it and all that. But for stuff meant for the general population of CPAN, 3 extra characters won't kill anyone. At the very least, for the docs. As for $t, maybe it's just me, but that's my first choice for any short-lived temp variables, so I've stuck to $tmpl for the template object. Reads better to me, and hopefully to the next maintainer. YMMV -- Josh I. On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Richard Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Michael Peters wrote: > >> Richard Jones wrote: >> >> Actually prefer $c these days as a) it's shorter and therefore quicker >>> and less easy to mis-spell (I seem to type slef more often than self), but >>> more importantly, having done a lot of work with Catalyst recently, that's >>> the Cat standard also, so it's familiar to me. >>> >> >> This actually came up in our discussions and we thought it would cause >> more confusion since in Catalyst the $c is not $self. It's a different >> object entirely. So calling it $c in C::A land might confuse the catalyst >> folks since it's really $self just shorter. Also, for folks playing with >> Titanium (which btw, does not have a friendly abbreviation :) do you plan on >> still using $c? Or will you go with $t? >> >> > Yes it's true it could be confusing as we won't need to *manually* shift > the class object into a variable any more, so the self-documenting nature of > this step is effectively lost to the unfamiliar observer. > > For me though, I still think I prefer the shorter form as it's used in all > rms and sometimes multiple times within an rm. And providing it doesn't > clash with any other abbreviated variable name and its use is consistent > throughout I think it should be OK. Personally I'd be happy to use $t for > the Titanium object since the letter 't' is even closer to the '$' key than > is the letter 'c' ;) > -- > Richard Jones > > > ##### CGI::Application community mailing list ################ > ## ## > ## To unsubscribe, or change your message delivery options, ## > ## visit: http://www.erlbaum.net/mailman/listinfo/cgiapp ## > ## ## > ## Web archive: http://www.erlbaum.net/pipermail/cgiapp/ ## > ## Wiki: http://cgiapp.erlbaum.net/ ## > ## ## > ################################################################ > > ##### CGI::Application community mailing list ################ ## ## ## To unsubscribe, or change your message delivery options, ## ## visit: http://www.erlbaum.net/mailman/listinfo/cgiapp ## ## ## ## Web archive: http://www.erlbaum.net/pipermail/cgiapp/ ## ## Wiki: http://cgiapp.erlbaum.net/ ## ## ## ################################################################
