Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2003
Re: new slurp module
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Uri Guttman
Date:
October 23, 2003 10:44
Subject:
Re: new slurp module
Message ID:
x7ptgndf2s.fsf@mail.sysarch.com
>>>>> "GA" == Gisle Aas <gisle@ActiveState.com> writes:
GA> Ilya Martynov <ilya@iponweb.net> writes:
>> I've seen file::slurp reinvented zillion times even if developers knew
>> about it (along "it is so simple module and I don't want another
>> external dependancy" line of reasoning). There must be a core module
>> for this! Both thumbs up for including it in core. And, yeah, I'd
>> keep old name.
GA> I agree. I think File::Slurp is a fine name for this but I don't like
GA> the current API. The function names to read/write whole files need to
GA> be short and sweet, otherwise why bother. I always reinvent the
GA> reader as a function called cat() myself but I'm not sure I would
GA> recommend that name.
i can add other aliases such as slurp and spew (in @EXPORT_OK)
GA> Other issues with such an API:
GA> - binmode or not by default
there is a binmode option on both read_file/write_file
GA> - how to specify IO layers to use
pass it in the binmode option as it is passed to binmode directly so you
can set a discipline.
GA> - how to report errors
rtfm. it can return undef or carp or croak
GA> - should it write directly or write to a temp and then rename
the write_file overwrites existing files
GA> The reader is probably much more useful than the writer and it is
GA> simpler to agree on how it should work. I would consider only having
GA> that.
i agree that read_file would be called much more often than
write_file. but i would think having both in the core would be not a
problem. the code is very short and the whole module is also small.
GA> The current append_file() and overwrite_file() functions seems useless
GA> to me. If you want this you are probably better off using open and
GA> friends.
those are aliases or wrappers that are only for backwards compatibility
with the current File::Slurp on cpan. neither are needed as their
behavior is supported in write_file. this breaking of that compatibility
is one reason i was interested in a new namespace. but the consensus so
far is to keep it file::slurp as that is already familiar.
is
uri
--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next