all will be well if every program does use Foo; that is never, ever preceded by use Foo::Bar;
I disagree with the two underlined wordings. It's possible that the two definitions of package Foo::Bar don't conflict, and that the overlap may even be intentional, for example if package Foo needs to monkey-patch something into Foo::Bar. Granted, these cases may be rare, and the point that the packages might conflict is very valid, but the above wordings are just too absolute for my taste.
In reply to Re^2: Multiple Packages in a Module?
by haukex
in thread Multiple Packages in a Module?
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |