Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2011
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org> wrote:
>> I have no objection to splitting out POSIX::SigAction and POSIX::SigRT
>> into separate .pm files that are used by POSIX.pm. (I.e. loading
>> POSIX should load those also.) I would accept a patch for that.
>
> What does this gain? I don't think that it simplifies anything.
Assuming some future where POSIX is broken up in to separate
sub-modules and POSIX.pm remains just as a shell to "export everything
by default", then I think it makes sense to split up.
E.g imagine:
use POSIX::errno;
If we go that way, then I can load just the errno bits without all the
rest of POSIX functions that I don't need. In a world split out like
that, then splitting out POSIX::SigActioni/RT makes sense to me.
(Though maybe they just wind up as inner packages in a POSIX::signal
module.
I'm not advocating for that (nor am I planning to do the work), but
I'm supportive of that direction.
-- David
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next