At 10:44 AM 7/29/02 +0100, Tim Bunce wrote: >"Thread::Needs" isn't a very descriptive name - it's too general. >Something like "Thread::NeedsModules" would be better.
Hmmm... if that's the only problem you have with it, I'm glad... ;-) I was considering something like this, but thought the huffmann coded name Thread::Needs would be sufficient. Do you have anything particular in mind with which Thread::Needs could confuse people (other than it being applicable to modules?). I thought that: Thread::Needs qw(This::Module That::Module); is pretty descriptive and shows what it's supposed to do. But then I may be suffering from tunnel vision in this respect... ;-) Liz
