http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10807
--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Druart <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Galen Charlton from comment #20) > (In reply to Chris Cormack from comment #19) > > Me either, except I think that for a module that isn't OO, get is a bad name > > for a subroutine. > > > > If it were $history->get() I'd be ok with that. But having to fully qualify > > it Search::History::get() to make it meaningful I think is a bit clumsy. > > Indeed, although a fully-qualified Search::History::get() might be better > than optionally exporting a GetSearchHistory(). > > But I think we're more or less on the same page -- best of all would be > turning it into a class, and I think that could be done with only a small > effort. Hello Chris and Galen, I created the module in the C4 namespace precisely because it is not a OO module. There are some doubt (at least for me) about how to create a new module into Koha: Dbix will arrive shortly (or not), Moo, Class::Accessor, etc. The last time I thought I created a correct module (bug 10363), the patch has been ejected in the discussion status. With this patch, I simply tried to group search history code into a module in order to re-use it somewhere else (bug 10862). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
