Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re: Re: Re: use Very::Long::Module::Name as Foo;

by liz (Monsignor)
on Oct 14, 2003 at 18:06 UTC ( #299206=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Re: Re: use Very::Long::Module::Name as Foo;
in thread use Very::Long::Module::Name as Foo;

Funny you put your example in the load namespace ;-). Or was that intentional?

I guess we agree to disagree. I find the syntax of

Very::Long::Module->load::as my $short => qw(foo bar baz);
very confusing. And a strange, roundabout way of setting $short.

...without trampling on any potential global namespace...

I think you touch on a very important flaw of my "as.pm" and of Package::Alias' approach as well. Consider a program which has:

use Foo; use Bar;
Now, Foo.pm has the following shortening (using my syntax for ease of reading):
package Foo; use Very::Long::Module::Name as Shorty;
and Bar.pm has the following shortening:
package Bar; use Some::Other::Long::Module::Name as Shorty;
Then you see we have a problem. One of the two modules will be referring to the wrong long module name, depending on whether an existing stash would be overwritten or not. In other words: you can only have one Shorty. That's because the stash aliasing (or the @ISA assignment) is not limited to the package scope from which it is invoked. And I don't see a way to encapsulate it, as all of the object creation is at run-time.

In my view, this pulls the rug from under any shortening approach currently available. As you cannot create code that can be well-behaved in that respect.

Too bad. It was a nice idea while it lasted... ;-)

Liz


Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: use Very::Long::Module::Name as Foo;
Select or Download Code
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: use Very::Long::Module::Name as Foo;
by tilly (Archbishop) on Oct 15, 2003 at 03:04 UTC
    Re-using load was not intentional, I was just looking for a name that made that line read relatively nicely, and I was in a hurry because I was late for work.

    As for the shortening approach, putting the package name in a variable works reasonably well. Putting the package name in a constant somewhat works. Both will work with the direct syntax, but not the indirect, my differing judgements on them are that people who don't understand the magic are (at a guess) more likely to accept the syntax error from the variable than from the constant. That is:

    my $short = 'Very::Long::Module'; use constant Short => 'Very::Long::Module'; # Later the following work: $short->new(@args); Short->new(@args); # The following do not: new $short(@args); # I'm guessing unsurprising? new Short(@args); # Possibly puzzling?
    It would, I guess, be possible to use source filtering to both set a constant and to rewrite indirect method calls. I wouldn't trust it too much though...

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://299206]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others musing on the Monastery: (22)
As of 2015-07-02 17:50 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The top three priorities of my open tasks are (in descending order of likelihood to be worked on) ...









    Results (44 votes), past polls