Stas Bekman wrote: > Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: > >> Following this discussion: >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107100040400003&r=1&w=2 >> >> I've made a few adjustements and cleanups. >> >> The following patch adds ModPerl::Util::file2package() to build a safe >> package from a pathname or filename. > > > Do you think we should really expose it in the public API? > package2filename is clear and generic, but file2package does a few > assumptions that might not be suitable to users. Do you think it'll > really speed up registry? If not I'd keep it as an internal util function.
I haven't looked inside the cooker recently, so I really don't remember how it all works... but if we use package2file and/or file2package in registry someplace, then there's the potential that users will want to subclass registry and will thus require either function to emulate core. as I said, I'm not sure how we use either at the moment - bringing it up just in case :) --Geoff --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
