>>>>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 08:25:20 -0800, "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I regret I didn't hear your talk, apparently I'm missing something.
> Well, it's still a stupid thing, but one that a number of people
> seem interested in extending.
Hear, hear.
> The cool stuff (well, what people tell me is cool) is simply
> the way that I've sewn together a number of well understood technologies
> (AUTOLOAD, typeglobs, Text::Soundex) to do something which is
> a very good example of something that you couldn't do in many
> other programming languages.
And you're convincing me quickly:-)
> Hope this clears things up. If you'd rather it was called something
> like Stupid::Approx::Sub, I'd be happy with that too.
Maybe Devel::Approx or Devel::Symbols::Approx? The rootlevel Approx::
seems too fuzzy to me for such a targetted module family.
--
andreas
