Re: [cgiapp] Re: RFC - C::A::Plugin - abstract base class for plugins

2004-08-08 Thread Michael Peters
Bill Catlan wrote: As long as some thought is put into writing the plugins, I don't really see a big problem here. Yes and no. Thought is one thing, but having to research the plugin methods exported by all /known/ plugins is another. As plugins proliferate, like we hope, what a chore that

Re: [cgiapp] Re: RFC - C::A::Plugin - abstract base class for plugins

2004-08-08 Thread Bill Catlan
Michael Peters wrote: Ok, some more thoughts and ideas on all of this... This method would work, but I think it has the possibility of adding new confusion, and it adds an extra level of indirection. I want to be able to write a plugin that replaces 'load_tmpl' for instance...

Re: [cgiapp] Re: RFC - C::A::Plugin - abstract base class for plugins

2004-08-08 Thread Ron Savage
On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:23:05 -0400, Bill Catlan wrote: Hi Folks Excellent. As I mentioned above, I think that a plugin user should be able to force a separate namespace though, and perhaps pass the forced reference (to the separate namespace) back to the plugin in case the plugin relies on

Re: [cgiapp] Re: RFC - C::A::Plugin - abstract base class for plugins

2004-08-08 Thread Ron Savage
On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 16:59:50 -0400, Cees Hek wrote: Hi Cess sub auth : CGIAppPluginMethod { my $self = shift; # do some cool stuff } sub _private_auth { # so some more cool stuff } In this case the 'auth' method would be exported and made available, but the _private_auth method would