in reply to Should MooseX::StrictConstructor be part of Moose itself?
I would say that this sort of thing probably should be discussed in some kind of a “best practices” (or “highly-recommended possibilities”) section within the Moose documentation ... rather than trying to incorporate it into (“so there!!”) an already rather-weighty system. We should, in our documentation, strive to guide the Gentle Reader, both to a proper recognition that these issues exist, and to some “really-good food for thought” concerning what to do. Shove the issue into his face, then point him (directly...) to Strict, and to Slurpy.
For one thing, we should be pragmatically mindful about the impact of “prior art.” It’s too late to dictate what shall be done. There’s already “too much Moose code out there in production.” Even if we did now try to fold this particular feature “into Moose,” this act will not have so much impact today as it would have had before Moose seriously began to take off. We can, and should, strive to influence future code, but there is already a build-up of legacy code here. Human decisions are going to play a major part from now on, so we should strive to inform ... but, to mandate ... those decisions.
|
|---|