Syntactic Confectionery Delight | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
And I need to build a website that allows users to sign-up to receive daily sales data charts in graphic format, I have 25 * 10 * 6 * 5 options. That's 7500 possible options, and that kind of site is not exactly complicated. It is more than a little disingenuous to say that you need to test anywhere near 7500 combinations of modules to find out which ones work well together. For the most part, all you have to do is pick the module in each of the four categories that works best for you. How do you know which individual components to choose from the vast choices? I'd start with modules I've used in the past, asking friends and colleagues for advice, and then searching the internet/perlmonks for discussions on the same topic. If those options fail, then it is time to get my hands dirty and start trudging through CPAN. Thankfully, when there are 126 Config:: modules there tend to be a lot of people with opinions of a small subset of them. Having solved just about every problem there is with Perl, I think we should (as a community) be able to find some way to rate combinations of modules and techniques as they apply to the various problems out there. Have you actually had this problem a lot in practice? I don't think I have ever looked into using a module that didn't explicitly state in the documentation that it was made to operate with other particular modules. This particular problem seems to be the exception and not the rule. I've never been bitten by it. I can't think of anyone I know telling me they'd been bitten by it, and I think you're the first person I have seen mention it at all. Maybe a kind of "create-a-combination" tool that then allows you to vote on it. If someone else has already created a combination identical to yours, you just go to that combination instead. You would end up with a vast number of positive votes in this system. You'd be better off having people submit just the combinations that are more difficult to use together. Otherwise we'd just end up with a bunch of noise saying Data::Dumper plays well with damn near everything :).
Oknow
In reply to Re^3: On the scaleability of Perl Development Practices
by oknow
|
|