Just another Perl shrine | |
PerlMonks |
Re^4: Web::Magic 0.005by tobyink (Canon) |
on Jan 15, 2012 at 09:32 UTC ( [id://947969]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Mojo is quite impressive for what it manages to do without dependencies. But really, say I bundled all the other distributions Web::Magic replies upon, and packaged them with Web::Magic. Then I could say it had no dependencies too. Many of Web::Magic's dependencies are indeed modules that I wrote, so I could have easily chosen to package them all into one distribution. But it seems more logical to provide more, smaller, independently testable and independently usable releases. And rely on a tool to keep track of dependencies between them. Perhaps a tool with a good track record of managing dependencies for Perl modules? Perhaps a tool that has been bundled with Perl for well over a decade? That 42% (actually 43% according to deps.cpantesters.org today) statistic is very misleading. The site that calculates the statistic acknowledges this. In practice the only dependencies of Web::Magic which have worrying fail rates are B::Utils which fails a lot on BSD, but seems reliable on other operating systems, and XML::Feed which has some date formatting test cases that seem to sometimes fail. (An Atom test case which expects a datetime in the floating timezone, receives one in UTC.) A force install on XML::Feed will almost certainly still give you a working copy. That said, Mojo's claimed HTML5 credentials are a bit suspect. The following code illustrates that Mojo::DOM's HTML5 conformance is not quite there yet:
For comparison, try the following in a modern, HTML5-capable browser (tested Firefox 3 and Opera 11):
In Section
Cool Uses for Perl
|
|