On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Marco Marongiu 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?
No, but it's not easier, and it's _much_ less flexible. The point is that
there's already a module that does exactly what you're proposing, and much
more.
> > What does your module offer that makes it worth _not_ getting all the
> > other features DateTime.pm offers, like useful time zone support, lots
> > of formatting & parsing options, the ability to do set math on sets
> > (union, difference, intersection, etc.)?
>
> Maybe the fact that I don't need all the other features?
Sure, but you don't really lose anything from having them there either.
And more to the point, others may see your module, start using it, and
then realize that they're stuck with a module that doesn't do everything
they need, and so they'll be stuck either replacing it or doing extra work
to add what they need.
> > However, I think the docs for DT::Event::Recurrence need some work,
> > because I don't the fact that you can do easy stuff with it is obvious.
> ----------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Is there a "think" missing?
Yes.
> Anyway, I agree with you: from the docs you have the feeling that all
> the framework is a lot complicated...
Yeah, the docs need reworking. But as I said, the module does do exactly
what yours does, as easily. I agree with Michel that having lots of
overlapping modules on CPAN doesn't really serve the community well.
In your response, you asked if you could contribute to the DateTime
project, and then answered yourself in the negative. That's fine, but you
don't need to in this case, because a module already exists that does what
you want ;)
-dave
/*=======================
House Absolute Consulting
www.houseabsolute.com
=======================*/
