From: Keli Hlodversson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: l�r nov 22, 2003 13:41:56 Europe/Copenhagen To: "Andrew C. Flerchinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Syntax::Highlight
On fredag, nov 21, 2003, at 19:32 Europe/Copenhagen, Andrew C. Flerchinger wrote:
At 03:17 PM 11/21/2003 +0100, you wrote:* Enrico Sorcinelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-21 13:16]: > How about Text::Highlight::* for your module?
I was just going to suggest the same. Including for your Log module - although maybe there already being a well populated Log:: TLNS makes it a weaker argument in your case.
Anyway, if it were Text::Highlight, wouldn't it make sense to move Syntax::Highlight::Perl and HTML::SyntaxHighlighter to Text::Highlight::HTML and Text::Highlight::Perl to keep all syntax highlighters in the same place? Granted, all three have different interfaces so the assumed relationship from namespace would be misleading. That's the reason I wanted to just use Syntax::Highlight. It's a language-generic namespace and it fits with half the syntax highlighters currently available on CPAN.
I think you're right about Text::Highligt being a bad name... How about Text::SyntaxHighligt... or how about Language::SyntaxHighlight? I think both are better than creating a new top-level hierarchy called Syntax. (What would you put in syntax, which can't be put into either Text or Language?)
-- With kind regards Keli Hlodversson
Give them great meals of beef and iron and steel, they will eat like wolves and fight like devils.
