On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, John Peacock wrote:
At the risk of sounding flippant, why not rename the existing DateTime class to DateTime::Fat (or the less inflamatory DateTime::Base) and put the proposed module in it's place as DateTime. If it is designed well, everything should Just Work(TM) with the shim class, which should always be faster than the existing class, even with the extra dispatch to plump up the object when needed.
It has a pretty different API, in that it's new() constructor accepts anything without validation.
I suppose it could check for extra args and call DateTime::Fat->new() if needed.
I think that'd be a possibility, but it'd have to pass the DateTime.pm test suite in that case.
-dave /*=================================================== VegGuide.Org www.BookIRead.com Your guide to all that's veg. My book blog ===================================================*/
