Il Mon, 12 Jan 2004 20:53:21 -0800 "Edward S. Peschko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
Hello,
I am really sorry for the delay in answering back.
> it doesn't quite fit the App::Packer mold, so I modified App::Packer
> and turned it into App::Packer::Temp, and added some stuff I wanted
> to see.
I have some questions about your App::Packer changes.
> 3) added the ability for the frontend to be either a module
> (series of
> functions) or a reference (object) (to App::Packer)
Ok.
> 4) added the ability to App::Packer to automatically require
> the appropriate backend or frontend modules.
Ok.
> ...along with the accessors, mutators, etc, that you might expect
> with
> a module such as this.
+ my $fe = $self->{FRONTEND} =
+ ($args{frontend}->can('new'))? $args{frontend}->new :
$args{frontend};
Is it intentional that passing in a reference to an object having a ->new method
(such as an App::Packer::Frontend::ModuleInfo instance) will call the method on the
reference? Can this be changed to:
my $fe = $args{frontend}; $fe = ref( $fe ) ? $fe : $fe->new;
+ $self->_set_args( %args );
+ $self->_set_options( %args );
What does this accomplish that can't be accomplished with ->set_options?
And why did you need a new ->set_args method?
+ $be->set_front($fe) if ($be->can('set_front'));
App::Packer is all about separating frontend and backend, while this change
allows to couple them. Could you explain why it was necessary (i.e. why you
could not separate Module::ScanDeps and PAR functionality)?
- $this->_frontend->set_file( $file );
+ $self->backend->set_file($file);
Why was this change necessary? Apart it breaking
documented A::P interface, can't the same information
be gained through the 'file' argument to A::P::B::set_files.
+sub go
+sub generate_pack
+sub run_pack
+sub add_manifest
+sub pack_manifest
I could use a bit of explanation on those methods. I reckon they
are somewhat PAR-specific, but the goal oof A::P is *not* being
frontend/backend-specific. With that information I hope I will be able
to fit these methods in a backend-agnostic interface.
+sub add_back_options
+sub add_front_options
They seem to be unused and redundant; can they be removed?
Thanks in advance for your patience.
Mattia
