note tobyink <p>Modules (i.e. ".pm" files containing Perl code) and packages (i.e. namespaces that subs and variables can be defined in) are two different things. There is no rule that says you <em>must</em> keep their names aligned.</p> <p>However, when you do align their names, certain Perl features work in your favour - for example, the <c>use</c> statement. <c>use Foo::Bar</c> is defined to load the file <c>Foo/Bar.pm</c> and then call the <c>import</c> method in the <c>Foo::Bar</c> package. This feature is super-handy when the <c>Foo::Bar</c> package happens to be defined within the file <c>Foo/Bar.pm</c>; less so when it isn't.</p> <p>If you know what you're doing, and are aware of the order in which Perl processes things, how <c>use</c> works, etc, then it's sometimes possible to break the alignment in useful ways. For example, keeping several small packages in the same file can make sense - it will improve load speed, they can share lexical variables, etc.</p> <p>But for the most part, unless you have a specific reason not to, you should try to keep package names and module names aligned.</p> <div class="pmsig"><div class="pmsig-757127"> <small><small><tt>package Cow { use Moo; has name => (is => 'lazy', default => sub { 'Mooington' }) } say Cow->new->name</tt></small></small> </div></div> 1014776 1014776