Re: Relative Module Path

Why not combine P and M into a single unit? That way you're sure they won't be separated by a too-specific copy command.

Using your example, ~/P would become:

#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use M;
my $m = M->new;
#
# End of main program
#
package M;
sub new{1};
1;
[download]

Comment on Re: Relative Module Path Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Relative Module Path by pbeckingham (Parson) on Aug 01, 2004 at 15:01 UTC
Why not combine them? Because there are many modules, and many more programs that use them. The example shown was just that - an example. The real code is somewhat more complex.	[reply]
Re^3: Relative Module Path by tadamec (Beadle) on Aug 02, 2004 at 00:59 UTC
Ah, gotcha. I use something like this for situations where I have a local "lib" directory. You could probably modify it somewhat: `#!/usr/bin/perl use strict; # Always use strict. my $BASEPATH; # # Include path magic. # BEGIN { use File::Basename; use File::Spec; my $PROGRAM = File::Spec->rel2abs( $0 ); ( undef, $BASEPATH, undef ) = fileparse( $PROGRAM ); $BASEPATH = File::Spec->catdir( $BASEPATH, "../" ); my $LIBPATH = File::Spec->catdir( $BASEPATH, "lib" ); eval " use lib '$LIBPATH'"; }` [download] If you want to keep the module files in the same directory this BEGIN block should work (I haven't tested it): `BEGIN { use File::Basename; use File::Spec; my $PROGRAM = File::Spec->rel2abs( $0 ); ( undef, $BASEPATH, undef ) = fileparse( $PROGRAM ); eval " use lib '$BASEPATH'"; }` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]