Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2022
I wonder if it wouldn’t be more flexible to have
module_file_of (‘Foo::Bar’);
and then allow that to be loaded into require or used for any other desired purpose, rather than having a special “load” routine.
e.g.,
my $x = module_name_of('Foo::Bar');
require $x;
would be equivalent to
require Foo::Bar;
Or, maybe not.
To be honest, I’m not sure to what other purposes this function could be put, but it strikes me as the wrong thing to have some kind of data munging that can only be accessed through a separate function (as though we only had printf and not sprintf).
--
Aaron Priven, aaron@priven.com, www.priven.com/aaron
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next