On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Marco Marongiu wrote:
> Dave Rolsky wrote:
> > [...]
> > How hard is that?
>
> my $i = Date::Iterator->new( from => [2003,10,3], to => [2003,11,10] ) ;
> while (my $day = $i->next) { ... }
>
> Is this harder?
>
> > What does your module offer that makes it worth _not_ getting all the
> > other features DateTime.pm offers [...]
>
> Maybe the fact that I don't need all the other features?
I believe this kind of attitude leads to dilution of efforts and lowers
the usefulness of CPAN. I know it is hard to decide to abandon a module
that you spent some time writing and whose interface you are (obviously)
quite happy with. But if you really want to do something useful for the
community, it is nevertheless The Right Thing To Do (tm).
I have more than once started writing code, only to discover, after
discussing it here, that I had overlooked an existing module that did
nearly the same thing. In this case I either just abandon the module, or
put it up on my website but not on CPAN. If I think I came up with an
interesting interface that could improve the existing module, then contact
the author to see if they would be willing to accept a patch.
Polluting CPAN with modules that duplicate existing functionalities is
definitely NOT responsible behaviour, especially in areas like Date:: and
Time:: where there is already much confusion, and an coordinated effort
to fix that confusion through DateTime::
In your case why not see if you can write a patch to one of the DateTime
modules that would give you an interface similar to what you wrote?
--
Michel Rodriguez
Perl & XML
http://www.xmltwig.com
