Module name suggestion

Anonymous Monk has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Module name suggestion by Corion (Patriarch) on Dec 23, 2010 at 12:41 UTC
Maybe `Foo::Common` or `Foo::Preamble`?	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: Module name suggestion by JavaFan (Canon) on Dec 23, 2010 at 14:18 UTC
I::am::too::lazy::to::come::up::with::an::editor::macro; I::like::to::have::people::wonder::why::I::did::not::enable::warnings: +:or::strict; I::wonder::what::is::in::this::module; This::enables::features::without::saying::so; Everyone::knows::what::strict::and::warnings::do::noone::knows::my::mo +dule; I::leave::people::guessing::what::is::in::this::common::module; Modern::the::three::year::old::version::of::perl; This::common::Foo::module::does::not::provide::anything::Foo::specific +::Neither::does::it::provide::any::logic; [download]	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Module name suggestion by Anonymous Monk on Dec 23, 2010 at 15:00 UTC
Even if you don't have to type it (using macro/template), you still have to look at it. Visual clutter or overload, I say. This is for an (internal) project, so chances are greater that every developer knows it. It follows DRY principle. If I can group several statements into a sub, why can't I also group several directives/preamble into one line? The Foo::common does provide something Foo-related: setting policy for every Foo module.	[reply]
Re: Module name suggestion by JavaFan (Canon) on Dec 23, 2010 at 14:21 UTC
I suggest using a name that tells what it does. Which would mean something like: `use StrictWarningsAutodieAnd510Features;` [download]	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Module name suggestion by Anonymous Monk on Dec 23, 2010 at 15:08 UTC
I get the sarcasm, but aside as a shorthand, Foo::common also serves another important function: enforcing uniform policy. It's easier in the future to deprecate something, etc.	[reply]
Re^3: Module name suggestion by Anonymous Monk on Dec 23, 2010 at 15:43 UTC
Foo::Policy ?	[reply]
Re: Module name suggestion by moritz (Cardinal) on Dec 23, 2010 at 18:32 UTC
Note that Modern::Perl already does that, except for autodie. Perl 6 - second systems done right	[reply]
Re: Module name suggestion by Anonymous Monk on Dec 23, 2010 at 14:00 UTC
Foo::ToolSet?	[reply]
Re^2: Module name suggestion by JavaFan (Canon) on Dec 23, 2010 at 14:20 UTC
But it neither provides anything related to Foo, nor does it have any tools. It's about an as bad misnomer as `Blue::Wednesday` would be.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Module name suggestion by Anonymous Monk on Dec 23, 2010 at 20:50 UTC
It seems directly related to Foo, because Foo is going to be the sole or primary consumer. And while you may think that using ToolSet with pragmas instead of more meaty modules isn't using it with "tools", you'd be wrong.	[reply]
Re: Module name suggestion by Anonymous Monk on Dec 23, 2010 at 19:22 UTC
Call it a ToolSet, like ToolSet::y Bundling commonly-used modules into a toolset Similar but different is perl5i - Fix as much of Perl 5 as possible in one pragma	[reply]


laziness, impatience, and hubris
	PerlMonks