----- Original Message ----
> From: Eric Wilhelm <scratchcomput...@gmail.com>
> Other details of the implementation will be up to the implementor. If
> that's me, I suppose I should have learned by now not to bother making
> a suggestion.
Eric, I know I come across as rather brusque at times and I apologize; it's
nothing personal! I really do want to understand where you're coming from. The
problem I have is that I've heard this argument many, many times in the past
and it's always gone nowhere. In this case, I simply don't understand how your
code solves the concerns people have. Sometimes I'm just slow in understanding
what someone is saying and I
think that sometimes your mind works fast enough that you jump from
point to point when some of us (me) need to crawl.
For example, with your code (as I understand it):
test {
my $manager = Feed::Manager->new($some_uri);
foreach my $resource ($manager->resources) {
ok my $result = $manager->get($resource), "$resource should work";
}
}
Imagine that the Feed::Manager connects to an outside resource I don't have
control over and one day they add a new resource. I now have a new test and
need to know that something has changed. I don't see how your code solves
that. One can argue that this is a stupid way to test, but I argue that I
don't want to tell people how to test. However, this seems so completely
orthogonal to your point of view that it's clear I'm missing something that
you've already understood :(
Cheers,
Ovid
--
Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/
Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl
Official Perl 6 Wiki - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6
