Tim Bunce writes:

> Re the choice of name for the low level library...
> 
>     Lib::Memcached
>     Lib::memcached
>     Lib::libmemcached
> 
> My preference is for Lib::libmemcached because it emphasises the name
> of the library that it's a wrapper for. (Think of "libmemcached" as a
> brand name.  easily find Lib::libmemcached.

Your proposed Lib:: namespace would be just for Perl modules which are
thin wrappers around external compiled libraries -- which are all named
libsomething.  This would mean that every single module in the Lib::
namespace would start "Lib::lib...".  That seems redundant: either one
of the "lib"s in the name should be suffice.

Or, to put it another way round, either Lib:: is intuitive enough that
people know what it means (in which case the second "lib" isn't needed),
or it isn't (in which case it isn't that useful as a name-space).

> ... I want people searching for libmemcached to also

I think 'the set of all modues relating to caching' is more useful than
'the set of all modules that are thin wrappers around a library which
was first implemented in a compiled language', so suggest
Cache::libmemcached.  Yes, Cache:: has some other modules in it you
don't want to be associated with, but then so do most Cpan namespaces --
I'm sure you won't be tainted by them!

Or if you want Lib::, then Lib::memcached makes the most sense.

Smylers

Reply via email to