Re^3: Why Does Test::Deep Kill Test::Class

This and some other stuff are the root of my hatred of default exports (and the lack of a nice way to use things without exports at all).

Comment on Re^3: Why Does Test::Deep Kill Test::Class
Re^4: Why Does Test::Deep Kill Test::Class by Your Mother (Canon) on Jan 09, 2009 at 19:59 UTC
A bit late reply, sorry, but I find "()" to be quite nice. You just have to cultivate the habit of using it.	[reply]
Re^5: Why Does Test::Deep Kill Test::Class by fergal (Chaplain) on Mar 20, 2009 at 16:45 UTC
`()` would be fine if you didn't then have to type `use Foo::Bar::Woz::Snuts (); Foo::Bar::Woz::Snuts::Wibble($x, $y)` [download] Python gets it right (well better at least) with `from foo.bar.woz import snuts; snuts.wibble(x, y)` [download] and suchlike. This is pretty much impossible in Perl due to symbol table access being absolute, not relative.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^6: Why Does Test::Deep Kill Test::Class by Your Mother (Canon) on Mar 20, 2009 at 18:01 UTC
You don't if the module does its exporting right, and most do. `use Foo::Bar::Woz::Snuts qw( Wibble );` I realize you're talking about having relative spaces in the code though. To me that would add arbitrary levels of (human) ambiguity for the hacker trying to read it. I think this could be solved in Perl too with some export/namespace alias magick but I wouldn't like or use the feature.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^7: Why Does Test::Deep Kill Test::Class by fergal (Chaplain) on Mar 26, 2009 at 13:06 UTC


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks