Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling

Re: Favourite modules April 2003

by PodMaster (Abbot)
on Apr 15, 2003 at 11:16 UTC ( #250534=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Favourite modules April 2003

I too am leaving out modules I maintain (btw I contribute on a lot of my faves )...
  1. Wx -- aaaaaw yeah!!!!!!!
  2. ExtUtils::Installed -- I use this a LOT
  3. PPM::Make -- this one as well
  4. ExtUtils::ParseXS -- this should be core (this is how xsubpp should be done)
  5. CGI::Wiki::Simple -- not bad, could be better ;)
  6. File::Spec -- portability, damn I like it
  7. Regexp::Common -- beginning to like it a lot
  8. Mail::Box -- it's getting better
  9. Audio::Beep -- fun ;D
  10. Module::Dependency::Grapher -- also fun
  11. CGI::Application -- I still love it ;)
  12. DB_File and/or BerkeleyDB -- and these, but you knew that ;D
There are a couple of others that could be on my list, but are currently unfinished, so they are not (CPANPLUS for example, or Test::Smoke).

MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!
I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6x+5.8x. I take requests.
** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Favourite modules April 2003
by barbie (Deacon) on Jun 03, 2003 at 12:30 UTC
    File::Spec -- portability, damn I like it

    Except when it makes your life hell due to incompatability with other modules, as you have to regex everything into Unix style to get modules like File::Basename to work with it. Or try using with a file upload from an OS that isn't the same as the server. As a consequence I now avoid it like the plague.

    Birmingham Perl Mongers
    Web Site:

      Could you add some more information about the incompatabillity prolem? I thought File::Spec was the way to go and I use it in one of my projects.
      The trouble you seem to be having is because you haven't read the fileparse_set_fstype portion of the File::Basename docs. Anyway, I know its been a year since you wrote this, but I finally wrote fileparse (just for completeness) and thought I'd share.
      sub File::Spec::dirname { my $self = shift; return $self->catpath( ( $self->splitpath(shift) )[ 0, 1 ] ); } sub File::Spec::basename { my $self = shift; my $name = shift; return ($self->fileparse($name, map("\Q$_\E",@_)))[0]; } sub File::Spec::fileparse { my $self = shift; my( $suffix, $path, $name ) = $self->splitpath(shift); $path = $self->catpath( $suffix, $path, '' ); for my $s(@_){ $self =~ s/($s)$//i and last; } $suffix = $1 ? $1 : undef; wantarray ? ( $name, $path, $suffix ) : $name; }
      Check out file.spec.basename.txt to test the above with the File::Basename test suite.

      MJD says "you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!"
      I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6.x and 5.8.x -- I take requests (README).
      ** The third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

      Maybe you'd like Path::Class better. I sure do, and I hope it isn't just because I wrote it. -Ken
        This only hides File::Spec underneath the covers. I expect I'd still encounter the same problems as I did before, as it will still stringify to the OS you're on. As I use Windows mostly, it doesn't integrate with Find::Find and others without some meddling.

        I have most problems with code written by others who aren't aware of the problems. Whether they use File::Spec or Path::Class, I don't see any difference between the return values being Windows style and then breaking when used directly in Find::Find or File::Basename. For them to work correctly you'll need to have:

        all over the place, which kind of defeats the object of using Path::Class in the first place :(

        Barbie | Birmingham Perl Mongers user group |

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://250534]
[Corion]: marto: Meh, so it'll be a day of cleaning out email...
[marto]: and hoped that I'd be able to continue the momentum :)
[marto]: I can't even access client email, nor my employers since those idiots moved to citrix
[marto]: it literally doesn't work. Also, via their citrix interface theres no way to open attachments, or upload an attachment for sending. The company policy is that you email you work account from a personal one, and forward it on from there :/

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (5)
As of 2018-01-16 08:53 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How did you see in the new year?

    Results (175 votes). Check out past polls.