develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from June 2006

Re: Its time we set the score straight on Perl 5 and Perl 6 and debunk our own self generated FUD.

Claes Jakobsson
June 16, 2006 09:08
Re: Its time we set the score straight on Perl 5 and Perl 6 and debunk our own self generated FUD.
Message ID:

On 16 jun 2006, at 17.30, H.Merijn Brand wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 16:58:01 +0200, Claes Jakobsson  
> <> wrote:
>> Another thing I like with Java and dot-not is that they clearly state
>> how to define APIs. Most (if not all)
>> Java libraries I've been using has a feeling of consistency because
>> they all useCamelCase. Yes, there is perlstyle, but
>> honestly how many of the CPAN authors have actually read it or cares
>> what it says. CPAN is a mess of various styles.
>> Maybe there should be some TPF-approval stamp on modules that follows
>> certain API guidelines setup by some group (maybe p5p) in order to
>> narrow the diversity of styles.
> I don't think so. CPAN is known for it's functionality and  
> versatility.
> If there would be a treshold like you propose, many, if not most,  
> authors
> (including me) would not care to contribute to CPAN.

I might have expressed myself a bit sloppy.

Anyone should still be allowed to contribute whatever they like to  
whatever API-style they want. But in order to get the magic TPF- 
approval stamp it
must follow a distinct  set of guidelines.

In the long run this would make it easier for users to select what  
modules for doing X they should use.

> Everyone (including me) uses "the best style". All other styles  
> will hinder
> the creativeness of their minds.

The internal style of a module shouldn't matter to anyone. It's just  
their public API that
I think would benefit from being consistent.

Inconsistency scares many potential Perl developers away.

However, this discussion probably makes more sense on cpan-

Claes Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About