Damnit, google turned off my Reply to All
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Chris Prather <perig...@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:18 PM Subject: Re: AttributeHelpers naming (again) To: Stevan Little <stevan.lit...@iinteractive.com> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Stevan Little<stevan.lit...@iinteractive.com> wrote: > I think we have 3 categories of things, at least in my mind ... > > 1) Low-level immutable data structures: > > ImmutableHash > List > > These have no mutation operations available and are building blocks for the > other mutable versions (see below). I doubt people actually use these ones > directly (at least not often). > > 2) Basic data-structures and values: > > Array > Hash > Bool > String > Number > Bag > > Array is an "extension" of List and Hash is an "extension" of ImmutableHash, > both providing additional mutation operations. Bool, String and Number are > just your basic values. Bag is just a poorly named and badly implemented > data structure. Now, these do not really map to the Perl Scalar, Array, Hash > types. However some of them do map to some of the basic Moose types (Bag > being the exception). > > 3) Code Patterns > > Counter > > We only have one of these, but I can see other patterns like some kind of > StringBuffer maybe (sure you could do that with String, but this would > provide sensible defaults). The key thing about these is that they provide > sensible types, default values and a subset of operations. They have a > clarity of purpose which makes them more self documenting and therefor very > useful. > > --- > > So, not sure this really helps. I wouldn't mind splitting these things into > 3 different categories or something. I mean, we are breaking back compat > with MX::AH so we are free to rethink this if we want. > The only thing that really ties these together is that they're unblessed attribute types, otherwise I think stevan's breakdowns here are exactly it. Breaking them apart into useful abstractions and possibly adding things like Queue, and Stack to the Code Patterns set (which would make Array a List + Stack + Queue) would be possibly the right idea. -Chris
