On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 08:40:52AM -0400, Matthew Pitts wrote: > On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 01:18 +0100, Matt S Trout wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:55:38PM -0700, Dylan Vanderhoof wrote: > > > Oh, missed this email. Yours looks better than mine. =) > > > > Except for being a performance hit on every single method call on $c > > (there's > > a reason I keep telling people not to make everything a plugin ...). > > Am I correct in saying that the NEXT overhead is proportional to the > number of packages in the ISA chain and not the number of methods the > plugins override? If so, then if I were to bring all my plugins into one > big "framework" plugin would that improve the NEXT performance?
Or you could avoid making them plugins. 9 times out of 10 they should've been a model, a controller base class or an external utility module - see the ExtendingCatalyst POD for more info. -- Matt S Trout Need help with your Catalyst or DBIx::Class project? Technical Director Want a managed development or deployment platform? Shadowcat Systems Ltd. Contact mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for a quote http://chainsawblues.vox.com/ http://www.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ _______________________________________________ List: Catalyst@lists.rawmode.org Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.rawmode.org/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/