|
Posted by Sherm Pendley on October 31, 2004, 2:55 pm
Please log in for more thread options
I have a module - CamelBones.pm - that until now has required the
presence of an embedded interpreter. It's similar to how the Apache::*
modules only work in that environment. So, I bundle the module with the
library framework, I I don't think too much about using a top-level name
space for it.
The framework is a Perl adapter for Apple's Cocoa libraries - but it's
not just a Mac Thing anymore. There are Debian GNU/Linux packages too,
that wrap it around GNUStep.
But now I have a CPAN module to wrap the library, making it accessible
to ordinary Perl scripts in addition to embedded apps. So I need to
think about the issue of a top-level name space.
Arguments for a top-level name space: Compatibility. There are apps out
there that use the framework as it is, and it would be useful if code
could be written to work in either environment. Model object classes
could be created with the data in mind, and re-used in batch scripts,
web frontends, and GUI apps alike.
It's portable, so wouldn't be a good fit for Mac::*. There are
precedents in Apache::*, GTK::*, Tk::*.
Any thoughts?
sherm--
--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org
| 
XML Sitemap