in reply to Can I please have *simple* modules?

I think you should write the general module that solves the task with a simple interface. Some of the modules you have mentioned (in this thread and others) make assumptions about the class implementation or other design details.

Your pain takes up two of chromatic's "Seven Sins of OO Programming" which appears in the next The Perl Review (and maybe in his talk slides if they are around.

As a PAUSE admin I don't mind Class::* pollution. In training and consulting I tell people to ignore that namespace since so much of it trivial code with much better ways to do things, and the ones that aren't are overly complicated that force you into a corner.

--
brian d foy <brian@stonehenge.com>
Subscribe to The Perl Review
  • Comment on Re: Can I please have *simple* modules?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Can I please have *simple* modules?
by Ovid (Cardinal) on Nov 23, 2005 at 07:35 UTC

    I've seen that talk. It was a good one. I look forward to the article.

    And while you as a PAUSE admin might not mind the Class:: namespace pollution, it was hell for me as a consumer to have to wade through all of them just to find out that what I needed wasn't there :)

    Cheers,
    Ovid

    New address of my CGI Course.

[reply]

      As a consumer, it's already hell. You'd be adding a grain of sand to a beach. :)

      The only way to get rid of the bad interfaces and unmaintained modules is to upload good interfaces that somebody will maintain. That the space is cluttered with crap shouldn't keep out the good stuff. Once you upload, I can say "Don't worry about remembering the name, just use the one Ovid wrote." :)

      --
      brian d foy <brian@stonehenge.com>
      Subscribe to The Perl Review
[reply]
        I agree, the pollution isn't really an issue at this stage. I don't really bother browsing CPAN at all. If I need a module for a specific task, I simply ask other people for recommendations. The cream does rise to the top; a good example is with date modules. A couple of years ago, there was a huge slew of them, all with various pros and cons, and most with some issues. Now, I wouldn't really think of using or recommending anything other than DateTime - it's the DBI of date modules.

        If there are major issues with existing modules, then I don't think people can complain if you release another one. Especially if you can't get the existing modules patched, and you put a note in the POD saying something like "Why another XXXX module?" and clearly lay out your reasons for re-inventing the wheel.
[reply]

In Section Meditations