Re^3: Choosing namespace/name for (my first) CPAN module which is a sub-class of a well-known distribution

is adding a dependency on File::Copy for trivial task a bad idea?

Note that it's included in core:

$ corelist File::Copy

Data for 2024-10-20
File::Copy was first released with perl 5.002
[download]

Comment on Re^3: Choosing namespace/name for (my first) CPAN module which is a sub-class of a well-known distribution Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Choosing namespace/name for (my first) CPAN module which is a sub-class of a well-known distribution by marto (Cardinal) on Nov 05, 2024 at 07:49 UTC
It's worth specifying all dependencies. Some systems ship with a bastardised 'perl', excluding things from the core.	[reply]
Re^5: Choosing namespace/name for (my first) CPAN module which is a sub-class of a well-known distribution by stevieb (Canon) on Nov 05, 2024 at 07:59 UTC
Agreed. I should have mentioned that. Even though something is in core, it should always be listed in the Makefile.PL (or whatever file your build system uses) as a requirement or dependency.	[reply]
Re^4: Choosing namespace/name for (my first) CPAN module which is a sub-class of a well-known distribution by stevieb (Canon) on Nov 05, 2024 at 07:42 UTC
is adding a dependency on File::Copy for trivial task a bad idea? What sleet is saying here is that it's absolutely not a bad idea to add the dependency to your chain, particularly because it's already in core. Personally, I have quite a few distributions on the CPAN that I wanted to make small, but when it comes to core modules, I'm all in on including them and decreasing my work-load for known-good functionality.	[reply]