develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from March 2011

Re: Revising Perl's OO docs - a new OO tutorial

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Peter Scott
March 4, 2011 16:07
Re: Revising Perl's OO docs - a new OO tutorial
Message ID:
On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 17:40:05 -0600, brian d foy wrote:
> In article <>, Peter
> Scott <> wrote:
>> (1) The most commonly agreed best practice O-O framework is Moose.
>>     Here's how to use it.
> I don't think you can support this statement. A very small slice of
> Perlers know what Moose is and like it. A slightly larger slice know
> that it exists but don't use it yet. Most people have never heard of it,
> just like most Perlers don't use most of Perl's features.  There's a bit
> of echo chamber there.
> That's nothing against Moose or its future. Let's just not misrepresent
> it.

I don't think it's misrepresenting.  The fact that most people using Perl 
don't know what Moose is doesn't alter the fact that among people who have 
the knowledge to make an informed choice, the most common choice *now* is 

Look at it this way.  Is the best practice to use some other framework, if 
so, which one?  Is the best practice to use *no* framework?  Hardly.  The 
most *common* practice is probably no framework, but our job is to educate 
people as to the *best* way to do things, not regurgitate the 
underinformed choices of the majority back to them.

A best practice isn't necessarily one that enjoys a large popular 
following, only that the people writing the documentation come to a 
consensus that it is so.  Among the people who influence the 
documentation, I contend that Moose is considered the best O-O framework 
by a clear majority, over any other framework or none at all.

By all means, let's not state that Moose is used by the majority of Perl 
programmers, that would be very wrong.

Peter Scott

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