On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 07:44:28AM -0800, Exide Arabellan wrote:
Im working on a module that utilizes POE::Component::Server::TCP. Being the neat freak that i am, im inclined to name the module POE::Component::Server::TCP::MUD, though it seems rather cumbersome. I've seen other modules (such as IRC::Bot) that take the last module and use it as the begining of theirs. However when doing a CPAN search, having the full title is helpful for a first glance appraisal of how its written.
Is this something people just do however they see fit, or is there a standard/movement to have it one way or the other?
POE::Component::IRC was published before general naming conventions were formed. The conventions remain malleable to this day, but there's a little method to the madness.
If your module implements a specific kind of MUD, possibly with a lot of modules, I'd suggest naming it Net::MUD::Arabellan (or whatever the name of your MUD is).
If it's a generic module for providing front-end TCP services to a back-end MUD engine, I'd suggest POE::Server::MUD. MUD servers tend to be TCP things by default, so specifying it in the package name seems redundant.
Disclaimer: I apologize if this has been covered, in the case that it has please point me to the post. I tried to scan for it, but didn't come up with anything.
No problem. Don't let the heavy development discussion scare you off. If it starts to get unbearable, we can always start another list.
Ah, thank you kindly. It is a content-less shell (content filled by MySQL), so POE::Server::MUD sounds like my solution :)
Exide Arabellan www.arabelan.com
