On Sun, 10 Oct 2004, Jonas B.Nielsen wrote: > Of course. I just looked over part of the DateTime modules and it > seems I screwed up seriously by using the DateTime ::Pregnancy name.
No big deal. I wouldn't call it _serious_. > Maybe it should just have been Date::Pregnancy even though it relies on > DateTime. Hmm, that's one possibility. > One could argue that it perhaps should aim at being separated into: > > - DateTime::Calendar::Pregnancy > - DateTime::Events::Pregnancy I think it'd just be the latter. It's not an alternate system of reckoning dates & times, just a set of calculations for events. If you wanted to rework the API to be OO and to look like the other event modules, that'd be good. Otherwise maybe we need another second-level namespace for this sort of stuff? I'm not sure what "this sort of stuff" really is though. > Maybe it would be a good idea to have something like DBI's DBIx for > stuff like the module I have created, which does not seem to fit in > anywhere. > > Perhaps: DateTimex::* DateTimeX has been proposed before. I for one like it, as a way for people to release stuff that does what they want, but doesn't aim at fitting in with the rest of the DateTime modules. I believe other people had objections. -dave /*=========================== VegGuide.Org Your guide to all that's veg. ===========================*/
