Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Handy dandy CPAN pollution

I'll be far more impressed if (when?) you help him fix it.

IMO the code in OOorNo is unfixable given the current state of Perl. Hypothetically a slight modification to the Perl source to provide a way of determining that a sub has been called via a method lookup (a flag in caller is my preference) would make the design feasable, however that change if done (I'd like it, and ive seen discussion of it in P5P) would only be useful on 5.10 at the earliest, so I think its probably better to rethink the objectives of the design.

See what quality of discussion is possible when people are something resembling civil?

Looks to me that the standard of debate is pretty good when a node is cantankerous as well.

:-)

--- demerphq
my friends call me, usually because I'm late....

Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Handy dandy CPAN pollution

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Re: Handy dandy CPAN pollution by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jan 07, 2003 at 21:53 UTC
Hypothetically a slight modification to the Perl source to provide a way of determining that a sub has been called via a method lookup You mean like `called_as_method` in Devel::Caller? :-) See my dissection of OOorNO for an example.	[reply] [d/l]
Re: Re^7: Re: Handy dandy CPAN pollution by demerphq (Chancellor) on Jan 07, 2003 at 22:24 UTC
Yup. Just like that. :-) But id like to see it removed from the Devel:: Namespace. I dont see how production code can use stuff from that branch. Oh and sorry I missed your analysis. :-) Ill read it now. Just finished. Great node. --- demerphq my friends call me, usually because I'm late....	[reply]
Re^9: Re: Handy dandy CPAN pollution by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jan 08, 2003 at 13:46 UTC
But id like to see it removed from the Devel:: Namespace. I dont see how production code can use stuff from that branch. Why (he asks curiously)? A module is a module. I use `Devel::` stuff in production code without a qualm. Should my clients be worried? :-)	[reply] [d/l]