Re^2: Is there an official regex for checking module names?

G'day ikegami,

Thanks for the feedback. As mentioned, this is for a $work project, which has various contraints, so some of these "exotic" forms wouldn't come up anyway. Quickly working through the list:

I'm familiar with "::" but it wouldn't pass code review (cleverness reducing readability). It would need to be changed to "package main".
While "_a" probably wouldn't pass code review (non-meaningful name) it does match the pattern: I added it the original code and got "ok 8 - Testing _a". I do use names with a leading undersore in t/name.t scripts: typically prepending Some::Work::Module with _Test::, _Mock::, or similar.
As already stated, non-ASCII names are disallowed ($work constraint).
Like you, I wouldn't have considered "aaaa::::::bbbb" to be valid. It wouldn't pass code review. Possibly flagged with "too damn weird; are you drunk?". :-)

— Ken

Comment on Re^2: Is there an official regex for checking module names? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Is there an official regex for checking module names? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Feb 09, 2022 at 00:13 UTC
I'm familiar with "::" but it wouldn't pass code review (cleverness reducing readability) No, it's not being clever. Do you write `package main::Foo::Bar;` or `package Foo::Bar;`? So why do you expect me to use `%main::` instead of `%::`? If I want the root namespace, that's what I use. Not some alias created so you can say "scripts run in main". Also, using `Foo::->method` instead of `Foo->method` solves a real problem. Again, not cleverness. While "_a" probably wouldn't pass code review (non-meaningful name) it does match the pattern oops! I saw the pattern for the lead character was shorter, and I somehow imagined that "`_`" wasn't included. As already stated, non-ASCII names are disallowed ($work constraint). That was not mentioned in the question. And you're not the only person using PerlMonks.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Is there an official regex for checking module names? by kcott (Archbishop) on Feb 09, 2022 at 02:28 UTC
I believe you have taken my comment about "`::`" completely out of context. You wrote "`package ::`" which is very obscure — I actually don't think I've seen it previously — for $work, I'd expect "`package main`", which is common and generally understood. "So why do you expect me to use `%main::` instead of `%::`?" I've no idea where that comes from. I did not voice such an expectation of you or anyone else. "Also, using Foo::->method ..." Again, I've no idea where that comes from; it wasn't mentioned in my post. In fact, I encourage the use of "`::->`" over just "`->`". "That was not mentioned in the question." My reply to you had "As mentioned, ...". "And you're not the only person using PerlMonks." Why write that? — Ken	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Is there an official regex for checking module names? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Feb 09, 2022 at 15:17 UTC
I've no idea where that comes from. You said using package `::` wouldn't pass review. («I'm familiar with "::" but it wouldn't pass code review») So it means that `%::` wouldn't pass review. Again, I've no idea where that comes from; it wasn't mentioned in my post. True, but you said `::` and `aaaa::::::bbbb` wouldn't pass review, so I extrapolated that `Foo::` wouldn't either. Why write that? The comment to which I replied assumed replies to your posts are only for your benefit. My reply to you had "As mentioned, ...". And I said that that this is irrelevant. Not everything is about you. You asked how to check if something is legitimate package name, and that was an important part of that.	[reply] [d/l] [select]