in reply to RFC: Tool::Box

- I like, how you keep track of the values, but no beginner can understand the difference between your min and List::Util::min. So the hardest part is to explain why someone should use this module in favor of List::Util.
- I personally dislike uppercase functionnames a lot!
- And there is already List::MoreUtils, perhaps your functions fit more in this module. Instead of a new one.
Boris

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Tool::Box
by Limbic~Region (Chancellor) on Nov 15, 2004 at 16:08 UTC
    borisz,
    • ...hardest part is to explain why someone should use this module in favor of List::Util
      • This is a good point in general. Perhaps the README should include a FAQ for questions like, why isn't there an X function. The reply would be because it is part of module Y.
    • I personally dislike uppercase functionnames a lot!
      • I have a tendency to name my subs like Add_Name and am not sure why I did all uppercase.
    • And there is already List::MoreUtils, perhaps your functions fit more in this module.

    From my original post:

    I want to stress that this post is about the idea in general and not this specific proof of concept.

    The reason the proposed name was Tool::Box and not Functions::List::Util::Forgot was because I see it as being a hodge podge of functions (such as getting the intersection of two arrays). These functions were only examples of what I was thinking about and not specific functions that I think should be included (concepts not specifics).

    Cheers - L~R

[reply]

In Section Meditations