I am really, really looking forward to that. I'm pretty sure I'll use it for new modules as soon as it is available.

As for the reasons, I'll just follow the points raised by 1nickt and explain why my opinions are different.

• An OO framework in the core is what I expect from a contemporary programming language. I'll expand on this in the last point.
• bless is fine, but not a framework, and the many degrees of freedom it provides make things complicated when you maintain sources written by different authors. Including packages written by myself if I look at them five years later.
• The syntax is unPerlish was my first reaction when I attended my first presentation about Moose. Well, technically this isn't even true since Moose itself is Perl, working with Jurassic Perl or better. Nonetheless I decided to give it a try, and I found the benefits well worth the learning curve. I'll do the same when Cor is available, only that this time I'm following the discussion and I know what to expect.
• (I don't care for the name, so this is just to keep the sequence)
• Today I am happily using Moo or Moose, though I found that there are a few things which I don't like. In my opinion Cor did nicely build on the lessons learned from Moo*. Some of my itches are:
  • It isn't core. This may be just a formality, but the fact that it isn't core makes it just one of the many OO systems bolted upon Perl 5. It turns out that Perl has a lot of experienced developers, and many of them are pretty opinionated which of them is the Only True one. I hope that an OO system in core will be the primary choice in the future. It won't be perfect for me, maybe it won't be perfect for anybody, but given the open discussion Ovid is moderating here I am optimistic that it will be a system most of us can live with quite fine.
  • The syntax is a bit clumsy. I guess that this can't be avoided if you want to run it on Jurassic Perl, and I still find it amazing that it is possible to implement Moo(se) with the feature set of Perl 5.8. In core, an OO system can do better.
  • The has function is overworked (I seem to recall that there's an article by Ovid about that but can't find it right now). With plain bless, parameters for object creation and object attributes were totally independent (which means you have to code it all by hand), with Moo* everything needs to occur in has (or as a fallback munged in BUILDARGS).
  • An object system in core will be faster than Moo*.

That said, I'm also curious how and when PPI, PPR and the various editor modes will recognize and support Cor.

---

---

Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!

Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.

Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.

Please read these before you post! —

• How do I compose an effective node title?
• How do I post a question effectively?
• Markup in the Monastery

Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:

a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr

You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)

	For:		Use:
	&		&
	<		&lt;
	>		&gt;
	[		&#91;
	]		&#93;

Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?

See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.