I saw in a recent node of Juerd's (it isn't really relevant where) the following code:
use lib '.';
Now, at one point I used to do this myself. However, on accident one day I noticed that it wasn't necessary. Observe:
[scorch:~/monks] alex% ./testlib.pl
bar
bletch
[scorch:~/monks] alex% find .
.
./Demo
./Demo/SubDemo.pm
./Demo.pm
./testlib.pl
[scorch:~/monks] alex% find . -name '*p[ml]' -exec cat {} \;
package Demo::SubDemo;
$baz = "bletch";
1;
package Demo;
$foo = "bar";
1;
#!/usr/bin/perl -wl
use Demo;
use Demo::SubDemo;
print $Demo::foo;
print $Demo::SubDemo::baz;
[scorch:~/monks] alex% echo $PERL5LIB
PERL5LIB: Undefined variable.
Note that nowhere am I asking perl to use "." in @INC. Yet, perl still sees it. I think this is pretty sensible behaviour. Additionally, were I to have POD in any of the Demo modules, I could use perldoc, and it would DTRT as regards '.'.
Am I missing something that coders are using lib this way? I guess with the exception of CGI applications (although I suspect it isn't necessary there, either).
Cheers
dep.
--
Laziness, Impatience, Hubris, and Generosity.
minor reword edit on first line.
-
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
-
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
<u> <ul>
-
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
intervention).
-
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.
|