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

Not ever having put together a module I felt was worth sharing before, I'm looking for suggestions about a good package name for my module.

Basically this module sends Windows API calls to the Winamp MP3 player using Win32::API. The idea is that I now have a module on top of which I can build a (password protected) CGI so that I can control my audio stream without logging in at the console. I plan on posting it here for review once I'm satisfied with it.

If I feel enthusiastic one day I'll probably convert it to XS because using Win32::API feels like an ugly hack (but it works).

But in the meantime I need to figure out a good package name. So any ideas?

--
Grant me the wisdom to shut my mouth when I don't know what I'm talking about.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Good package name for Winamp module?
by Mr. Muskrat (Canon) on Mar 12, 2003 at 18:25 UTC

    There is already a Winamp::Control module that requires a Winamp plugin.

    Since it uses Win32::API and does not need a plugin, perhaps Win32::API::Winamp or Win32::Winamp.

[reply]
Re: (nrd) Good package name for Winamp module?
by newrisedesigns (Curate) on Mar 12, 2003 at 18:30 UTC
[reply]
Re: Good package name for Winamp module?
by PodMaster (Abbot) on Mar 13, 2003 at 09:29 UTC
    Have you heard of ATI AMMO SDK? I thought about writing an XS extension, but it makes no sense (how would you model it? ridiculous, I know).

    I say stick with Win32::API, and call it Winamp::Control::Win32API.

    MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!
    I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6x+5.8x. I take requests.
    ** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

[reply]
Re: Good package name for Winamp module?
by crenz (Priest) on Mar 13, 2003 at 10:45 UTC

    I think it was a less than ideal choice for the author of Winamp::Control to create a Winamp:: namespace. I'd go for Audio::Winamp::Control; maybe in your case Audio::Winamp::Control::Direct.

    Rationale:

    • Audio It has to do with audio software. Audio is a well-known namespace.
    • Direct The fact that you use Win32::API is not quite relevant to the user. I would rather emphasize that no additional plugin is needed. Admittedly, Direct is not a good choice. It's the best I can think of :)
[reply]
      Winamp is not for audio anymore.

      The Winamp namespace already exists, so he should reuse it, and not introduce yet another namespace.

      Direct isn't very meaningful, and at least Win32 or Win32API signifies which platform it works on.

      MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!
      I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6x+5.8x. I take requests.
      ** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

[reply]

        I agree that "Direct" isn't meaningful. However, Win32API would be nonsense once he uses XS (Yes, he'll still be using the Windows API. All modules on Win32 use the Windows API in some way or another). Win32 doesn't make much sense to me either, because WinAmp runs on Win32 only.

[reply]

        Hmmm... I haven't tested my module with Winamp 3 so as far as I know this module is strictly audio. I know for sure that the window lookup will fail. Winamp 3 is a complete rewrite so I don't think the API calls are the same.

        --
        Grant me the wisdom to shut my mouth when I don't know what I'm talking about.

[reply]

Back to Seekers of Perl Wisdom