in reply to RFC: Tool::Box

IMHO, there is a level — measured in snippet code size — below which it does not make sense to encapsulate in a module. At that level, the toolbox should exist in the programmer, not in some external library. Above that level, the snippets are going to be specific enough that they ought to live in the appropriate module. Your example above is a just one such: Those functions should go in List::Util. Any other routines you'd be inclined to throw in which would be inappropriate for List::Util would also be inappropriate alongside these functions in any other module. Just MHO.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Tool::Box
by Limbic~Region (Chancellor) on Nov 15, 2004 at 16:13 UTC
    jdporter,
    Just to recap so I am clear:
    • Relatively small snippets by themselves do not belong in a module
    • Collections of related snippets may warrant an appropriately named module
    • A "left overs" or "hodge podge" of snippets doesn't belong in a module, but should be part of the programmer's knowledge base.
    Just MHO

    That's what I asked for and thanks for giving it to me. Like I said, I could see it going both ways. Still not sure I am convinced either way though.

    Cheers - L~R

[reply]
[d/l]
      Let's carefully consider this one:
      A "left overs" or "hodge podge" of snippets doesn't belong in a module, but should be part of the programmer's knowledge base.
      The snippets that are common knowledge to a significant portion of the community ought to be taken out of our personal, back-of-the-brain closets, dusted off, and given proper names. Let us place them firmly in the common, community-wide knowledge base.

      Why should every programmer in the community have their own pet versions of common but "noncollectable" functions? If there is value in giving something a name, give it a name. If there is value in collecting something, collect it.

      Who cares how big the thing is or whether there's already enough stuff like it to form a ready-made home for it? If the cost of giving it a name and collecting it and then using it to solve problems is less than the cost of solving the problems otherwise, then it has earned its name and its place. What other consideration is there?

      Cheers,
      Tom

      Tom Moertel : Blog / Talks / CPAN / LectroTest / PXSL / Coffee / Movie Rating Decoder

[reply]
        tmoertel,
        The quote was my interpretation of what jdporter was saying. I don't necessarily agree nor disagree which is why I was soliciting opinions. Unfortunately, the only people that have responded are people who would not necessarily benefit from the module (they are experienced programmers who have already assimilated the knowledge). I was hoping for some of the relative newcomers to have weighed in.

        I am still on the fence.

        Cheers - L~R

[reply]

In Section Meditations