Dave, I must have overlooked the "name => $name," option in the documentation. Thank you for pointing it out.
I also appreciate the the suggestion for a module namespace. I am happy to acknowledge that what I am attempting is a shortcut only. Best Regards, Jed On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Dave Rolsky <auta...@urth.org> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Jed Lund wrote: > > I wrap two changes around Moose::Meta::Class->create in my proposal. I >> accept named hash value pairs for everything including a new package name >> where ->class() expects the new name as the first argument. >> > > Actually, Moose already accepts key/value pairs for this method, but this > is documented (this thing with multiple calling styles is something I > really hate in the Moose core). > > Most (but not all) methods of the ->method( $name, %args ) style also work > with ->method( name => $name, %args ). Substitute the "name" key for > "package" or whatever is appropriate. > > Anyway, calling this MooseX::Util::ClassBuilder seems kind of weird since > Moose already has plenty of class building support. > > It's more like MooseX::ShortCut::BuildClass or something. > > > > -dave > > /*============================**==============================**== > http://VegGuide.org http://blog.urth.org > Your guide to all that's veg House Absolute(ly Pointless) > ==============================**==============================***/ >
