Re^2: Should I upload it on CPAN?

[BrowserUk]

I got the script itself down to just two lines of code. The bulk of the code is in Module::Reprove, while App::Reprove handles command-line processing, output to the terminal, etc.

Are either of those two modules useful for anything standalone?

If, as I suspect, the answer is no, then what the &%&^%&^ is the point of making them separate modules?

And what is the point of a 3 line script?

It's like saying you've built a personal flying machine that only weights 20 kgs. You just put it on and board any jet that going where you want to go.

It's this kind of pseud-OO bullshit that makes CPAN a pain to use.

[chromatic]

And what is the point of a 3 line script?

I used to think that too, but I've moved more and more of my programs into modules and used wrapper scripts to invoke them with the most common arguments already defined. It's improved the testability and usability of a lot of my code. Otherwise I ended up with a lot of shell aliases to invoke modules—and there's not much documentation there.

[BrowserUk]

Let's see.

2 modules; 2 namespaces; and two hundred and eighty eight support modules:

<Reveal this spoiler or all in this thread<!--

Read more... (10 kB)

To create a 3 line script that downloads 2 files, constructs a single object and calls a single method upon it -- Ie. Calls one function passing some parameters.

And when it goes wrong, no one knows how to fix it. If that's modern Perl, you can keep it.

Isn't it amazing how technology is giving us ever more powerful ways of creating unbelievable (and unintelligible) complexity from simplicity.

[chromatic]

Isn't it amazing how technology is giving us ever more powerful ways of creating unbelievable (and unintelligible) complexity from simplicity.

The same twelve tone western scale that allows Handel's music for the royalfireworks, Beethoven's symphonies, and Mozart also allows autotuned and sampled radio pop performed by talentless hacks. You can (rightly) decry the latter without diminishing the former.

Then again, Liszt would have fit right into the LA party scene.

[tobyink]

I'm not entirely sure what your point is.

# lib/App/Apache/Wrapper.pm
{
  package App::Apache::Wrapper;
  use Moose;
  has 'apache_path' => (
    is   => 'ro',
    isa  => 'Str',
    );
  sub run {
    my $self = shift;
    system($self->apache_path);
  }
}

# apache.pl
use App::Apache::Wrapper;
App::Apache::Wrapper
  -> new(apache_path => '/usr/sbin/httpd')
  -> run;

The fact that a program consists of instantiating a single object and calling a single method on it, is not necessarily an indication of the complexity of the program as a whole.

Yes, it's frustrating that App::Reprove has not worked for that person. On the whole its test results are reasonably good (about 90% pass) though there's room for improvement. I'm sure that by dropping MooseX::Declare (which is still pretty experimental) I could push that up to pretty close to 100%. But I have no immediate plans to do that. Maintaining Module::Reprove is not my main priority in life. Patches welcome though.

[tobyink]

Module::Reprove certainly is. App::Reprove probably less so. But a good reason to modularise code is to make it extendable using the well-understood mechanism of inheritance.