Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"
 
PerlMonks  

comment on

( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??
Interesting...

Honestly, I'd really rather not see yet another implementation of directory traversal in perl. What I think would be the ideal is to have just one implementation (let it stay File::Find, everyone already knows it!), but have that implementation be usable with each of these types of interface:

  1. callbacks
  2. declaratively (by that I mean: my @files = File::Find::find(...); or something similar)
  3. iterator

Presently, File::Find provides 1, directly. File::Find::Rule and its ilk provide 2 (as a wrapper around File::Find... which is great, because that means no one has to replicate the directory traversal code for that). The thing that's missing is a good iterator interface, and, again, that can't be built as a wrapper around File::Find.

So of course, the best possible thing (in my opinion) would be if someone rewrote File::Find so that it (internally) had an iterator interface:

my $finder = File::Find->new($opts, @dirs); while (my $file = $finder->next) { # do stuff }
And then, finally, to change the old familiar File::Find::find(...) to be implemented as a simple wrapper around File::Find's iterator interface:
# simplified a lot, but basically sub find { my ($opts, @dirs) = @_; $opts = wrap_wanted ($opts); my $wanted = $opts->{wanted}; my $finder = File::Find->new($opts, @dirs); while (my $file = $finder->next) { local $_ = $file; local ... # etcetera &$wanted } }
So you'd get:
  • all the benefits of each type of interface
  • the directory traversal written (and optimized and maintained, etc) only once
  • nothing gets broken (all we've done is to refactor and to add new functionality)

Of course, I feel bad demanding this, without volunteering to do it, but honestly, it would create legal complications if I were to do so (I've got one of those contracts where my employer owns everything I do... at least for the moment, but I've been promised that that will change at least somewhat by the end of july). But I still think that the "most best" approach is clear enough that it's worth setting down (even if I'm not going to go off and implement it myself).

------------ :Wq Not an editor command: Wq

In reply to Re^5: When should a wheel be reinvented by etcshadow
in thread When should a wheel be reinvented by fletcher_the_dog

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":



  • 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.
Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (6)
As of 2024-04-16 17:34 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found