On Tue, 2003-11-25 at 23:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
> Sadly it turns out to be not quite that trivial because the interface
> has this kind of style
>
> $obj->foo($bar);
> Ivy::foo($bar);
I prepared a mail yesterday, but did not send it, where I was asking
about this functiunal API. But you answered before I send you this
question! Just some more answers to Tim in a mail to come (about C libs
and perl).
> But even that's not a big deal. If the functions are exported then
> do things like:
>
> use base Exporter;
> our @EXPORT = @Net::Ivy::EXPORT;
>
> if it's not then do something like
>
> *$_ = \&{"Net::Ivy::$_"} for (qw(foo bar baz func names));
> Or do both. Either way, it's just a bit of "plumbing".
I will try and test it, but I am quiet confident now.
> (If the interface has deeper issues that'll cause problems then
> I'd be tempted to say it's broken and Ivy.pm should have more hacks
> for legacy support and Net::Ivy should have a better interface design.)
Well I supposed there should not be other pbs!
Thanks a lot to both of you for your suggestions and your time!
> Tim.
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 04:07:53PM -0500, Lincoln A. Baxter wrote:
> > As if Tim's opinions don't carry a huge amount of weight already, I will
> > add my $0.02 and agree with him 100%.
[...]
> > Lincoln A. Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Christophe M.
