in reply to Re^2: Why "no Moose?"
in thread Why "no Moose?"

"Moose is not and has never been a source filter"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Why "no Moose?"
by JadeNB (Chaplain) on Jan 27, 2009 at 20:59 UTC
    Surely that statement requires a precise definition of ‘source filter’? I'm no expert on Moose internals, but it's got a dependency on Filter::Simple.
[reply]

      Filter::Simple is only used by oose, which is "syntactic sugar to make Moose one-liners easier". The Moose you'd use for modules and applications is not a source filter.

[reply]
        Wow, that seems like an incredibly heavyweight dependency just to allow saving two lines. (I guess that it sounds better if you think of it as an almost-70% savings.) Thank you for pointing it out to me—I always just assumed that has and other syntax were implemented by filtering, rather than as simple functions.
[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom