He,he. But no, the whole point is that this will be usable for other stuff. It is a modelling application for things that can be described as hierarchical parts.
Say, think of a backend to an XML editor with an API so you can implement a data model which is semantically correct.
What it is usable for, would be to give messages like "Error! There are too few vacation days left" or "Err! That material for table legs would need too large a diameter to look good".
update: If I do a version 2, I'll integrate it with XML. There is an easy mapping between these object hierarchies and the XML tags.) (Also, fixed spelling.) | [reply] |
If it's a generic tool for dealing with hierarchies of things, maybe Tree:: would be a good place? I think Model:: would too generic -- better to try to describe what it is or does. (The "noun::adjective" style). As a last resort, maybe something under Data::. (c.f. Data::Grove or Data::Hierarchy.)
-xdg
Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.
| [reply]
[d/l]
[select] |
Thanks, sounds good.
Not "Simulation", since there is nothing like timing implementation, etc. What should fit would be object modelling, without people thinking about the programming subject "OO modelling".
'Tree::Model' ?
In retrospect, this is too large. I should have written a sub-level of CPAN packages and used them for the implementation. (Say, the object keeper with serialization, etc, should have gone to CPAN as a module first and then I could have use:d that.)
| [reply] |