Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Good of autovivification

by Anonymous Monk
on Apr 12, 2005 at 09:53 UTC ( #446908=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Good of autovivification
in thread The Bad, the Ugly, and the Good of autovivification

When a module become standard, that attitude changes somewhat.
But that's a really bad reason to make something part of the standard distribution. Then you'd put thousands of tiny little module into the standard distribution.
When does a module qualify as a standard module for you?
IMO, the only modules that should be part of the standard distributions are modules that:
  • Have a tight integration with the perl core. (strict, IO::*, Unicode stuff, B::*, etc).
  • Are necessary (or useful) to download and install other modules (CPAN, ExtUtils::*, etc).
  • Anything that's needed to make Perl "Perl": Exporter, Carp, English, etc.
So, IMO, many modules already part of the core shouldn't be there: Benchmark, Getopt, Memoize, Switch, etc. Anything that lives, or can live, independently on CPAN doesn't need to be in the main Perl distribution.

Note that I'm not advocating to remove any module from the core. I'm only saying that mistakes from the past shouldn't be repeated.


Comment on Re^4: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Good of autovivification

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://446908]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-12-22 06:27 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (111 votes), past polls