Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2003
Re: Hidden dependencies?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
fergal@pop.esatclear.ie
Date:
October 1, 2003 04:16
Subject:
Re: Hidden dependencies?
Message ID:
184670-22003103111819348@M2W040.mail2web.com
My email did contain a suggestion for helping them. Unless they're doing
funny things, packages should be able to work out their own must haves and
their own like to haves simply by knowing what modules will be publicly
used or required and tracing from there on.
I think adding "use if" to ToTk.pm doesn't make any sense because Tk is not
an optional requirement for ToTk.pm, it's mandatory. ToTk is an optional
requirement for perldoc but a "use if" would be no good there either
because you only want to use Tk if the command line switches ask for it,
otherwise perldoc would end up loading Tk, XML modules, RTF modules etc
just because they're available.
If every package of modules listed their root modules - that is their
publicly loadable modules - then it's possible to figure out the must haves
and the like to haves. This seems to me to be the correct way to do it,
whether it's practical...
F
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Johan Vromans jvromans@squirrel.nl
"fergal@pop.esatclear.ie" <fergal@escargot.esatclear.ie> writes:
> if you grep, you'll see that the ToTk.pm module isn't used or
> required by anything.
Yes, but the problem is that we're going to see this kind of problems
with automated dependency checkers for a long time. I agree with Hugo
that it would be useful if we could find a way to help out automated
dependency checkers. For example 'use if ... Tk => ...'?
-- Johan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next