On 10/10/04 8:58 PM, Rick Measham wrote: > I don't remember talking about it, but it seems a good idea to me .. however > I'd prefer DateTime::X::Pregnancy or DateTime::Misc::Pregnancy ... I just > think that DateTimeX looks too strange. It works for modules whose namespace > is all upper (like CGI, DBI, LWP etc), but looks a little strange for > namespaces like DateTime.
It looks strange in lowercase too. It *is* strange. What the heck does th "x" mean anyway? "Extend"? "Extend-but-not-in-a-way-that-fits-in-with-the- similarly-named-classes-that-don't-have-an-'x'"? It not a very elegant way to skirt the issue, IMO. Anyway, not knowing anything about the module but the name, it seems to me that pregnancy is not really an "event." It's more of an "experience" or perhaps "continuum"...or something. I'm sure a better place can be found for ::Pregnancy, and maybe also similar things. And if it is really an event, then it should probably be renamed ::Pregnancy::Conception or ::Pregnancy::Birth or whatever it is. Also, the ::Event:: "super parent" API should be able to handle these kinds of "personal events" in addition to things like Easter Sunday. If it's going to claim the entire ::Event:: tree, it has to be very flexible and/or willing to accommodate. > That, however, is just my $0.02. We do need some namespace for modules > that don't fit elsewhere. Given the choices of "X" and "::Misc", I'd take "::Misc". It still seems like a cop-out, but at least it's somewhat meaningful. -John
