develooper Front page | perl.module-authors | Postings from December 2005

Re: New module: FLV file parsing

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Austin Schutz
Date:
December 2, 2005 14:20
Subject:
Re: New module: FLV file parsing
Message ID:
20051202222018.GO7172@gblx.net
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 04:04:11PM -0600, Chris Dolan wrote:
> So, I already published it as FLV::Info, but this discussion has  
> convinced me that FileFormat::FLV is the best option.  I may use that  
> name for v0.02.  My only hesitation is that nobody else seems to be  
> using that top-level namespace at this time.
> 
> The FF:: namespace is a terrible idea, in my opinion.  I expect that  
> it will be meaningless to the majority of module searchers.  The  
> argument that search makes names irrelevant is just silly.

	..because?

	Ok, I want to do something with my flash file. I search for
'flash file'...  Oh look, there's a flash file parser. Do I care what it's
called? No. I concur that the module name is effectively meaningless, but I
don't see that it makes any difference to the searcher.

	It's marginally helpful to have a useful name when including it
in a module so code doesn't look like $flv = new ASDFsdafs::sjhsdlk, but
beyond that, what tangible and practical difference does it make?

> If that  
> were true, the practice of bouncing name ideas off this email list  
> would cease, and I'd just name it FLV.pm.

	As I understand it there's some rationale for keeping the top level
namespace small, so that would probably not be a good choice. Beyond that,
name it what you will.
	I submit these long threads about which module name is better than
some other similar name are a waste of time, and I do indeed suggest
we take them off list as a general rule.

	Austin

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About