Tim Jenness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ, Why don't you use Pod::ParseUtils that is already in the core and > does exactly what you want (although it will need updating to match any > changes to L<>). I think that releasing a new link parser is sure to > confuse people (and we don't really want two link parsers in the core > distribution).
Because it's *way* too complicated for what I'm doing and assumes a different parsing model than I'm using. The module I just wrote implements only and exactly the parse described in perlpodspec. This is the problem with a lot of the different parse utility modules that I've seen. They all seem to assume that one wants to use a tree-based parsing model where the entire document is read in before any output is produced, or that one wants to use an object/accessor mechanism. I really don't want to do either; I just want to pass link text into a function and get back its four components and its type. Pod::ParseUtils's Pod::Hyperlink class could easily be implemented internally by using Pod::ParseLink, and that would have a lot of advantages for uniformity of parsing. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
