http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=506888


in reply to Re^7: What is YOUR Development Process?
in thread What is YOUR Development Process?

I don't think you're leveraging the greatest benefit of CGI::Application which is the parent class.

Actually, I'm leveraging it more than the average CGI::App user. I have a CGI::App subclass that manages my framework. If I have an app, say, a CRUD app to manage contact lists, it exists as a subclass of my framework class, and might have 5-10 instance scripts. Should I have a peculiar version, sure, i'll subclass it and have some particulars, for for a lot of apps only the templates and the names of some fields change. So I reuse the parent class. A lot. More than most CGI::App people, based on my questions in the past few years on that mailing list.

I'm not clear on what you're suggesting that I'm not doing.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: What is YOUR Development Process?
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Nov 08, 2005 at 21:18 UTC
    You were mentioning that developer A produces version 1.0 of some C::A subclass for application Foo. Then, developer B comes along and upgrades that same C::A subclass to version 1.1 for application Bar. All of a sudden, application Foo doesn't work the same.

    To me, each application should have its own subclass, even if that class is nothing more than

    package Our::Web::Apps::Foo; use base 'Our::Web::Apps'; 1;
    If only to avoid the problem that you're discussing.

    My criteria for good software:
    1. Does it work?
    2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?