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

Re: The future of POSIX in core

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Aristotle Pagaltzis
September 2, 2011 19:11
Re: The future of POSIX in core
Message ID:
* David Golden <> [2011-09-02 18:20]:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Nicholas Clark <> wrote:
>>> I have no objection to splitting out POSIX::SigAction and
>>> POSIX::SigRT into separate .pm files that are used by
>>>  (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 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.

Assuming that future I’d agree. But as long as that future hasn’t
arrived it seems a pointless worsening of the present to split the
packages out. The splitting can easily be done as part of the commit
which brings about the future anyhow.

Aristotle Pagaltzis // <>

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