develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from December 2016

Re: Should we bring in Module::Runtime into core?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Sawyer X
December 8, 2016 11:31
Re: Should we bring in Module::Runtime into core?
Message ID:
I think good points we made here. My position is also wishing to avoid
adding modules. Modules I would consider are such that solve a common
basic problem, have little opinion, and a great net-gain across the
board of users. This is why I threw Module::Runtime into this.

Now, having said that, the comments were very useful and I appreciate
them and agree with them. I agree with Vincent's summary of having one
good loader in core instead of multiple ones.

I would like to then ask the following question: How plausible is it to
"fix" Module::Load, considering people might expect its heuristic behavior?

On 12/06/2016 11:21 PM, Vincent Pit (VPIT) wrote:
>> If anything, I'd lean towards fixing Module::Load, if only because we
>> actually have other modules in core that already depend on it (mostly
>> via Module::Load::Conditional).
> This is my opinion as well.
> Compared to Module::Load, Module::Runtime has a couple of extra
> workarounds for bugs in pre-5.12 perls that can be easily ported if
> deemed acceptable with regards to compatibility. Module::Rutime's
> interface is generally better, but the relevant alternate interfaces
> could be added to Module::Load.
> Let's just focus in having one good loader in core, that's less
> maintenance in the long run, and more user-friendly.
> Vincent

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