Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2021
> On Sep 3, 2021, at 12:48 PM, Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote: > > So, let's say we were to implement a new require-like builtin that we wanted to be a core language feature and live forever. Would it be something other than something really close to Module::Runtime's use_module? I have some thoughts, but I think the basic question here is: > > Is it enough to say "v5.x will provide load, which will take a module name and optional version, then load that module (or die trying) and call ->VERSION on it. There’s an opportunity here. Occasionally I’ve implemented plugin-like things where I require() a module that isn’t actually “required”. To differentiate “no such module exists” from “failed to load module” I’ve had to resort to pattern-matches on the thrown error, which is ugly. I know the topic of structured or otherwise-machine-parsable errors is a quagmire, but would it be feasible to implement this new runtime module loader in such a way that a caller can reliably differentiate those two fundamentally-distinct failure states? -FGThread Previous | Thread Next