* On Mon, Feb 04 2008, Christian Bartolomaeus wrote: > I think about putting some generic, non-specific methods in a separate > module, which wouldn't be useful by itself, but would be used by the > more specific modules. Maybe it would be useful to put those generic > methods to > > Chess::Rating::Calculate
Sounds good. But how about just Chess::Rating? There's no reason to be too verbose... Chess::Rating is clear and easy to type. Anyone searching for a module that calculates chess ratings will likely find yours and the name will encourage them to read more about it. That's the goal. Also, do the users care about the algorithm used to calculate the rating? Would it not be better to have an API like: my $r = Chess::Rating->new( method => 'FIDE', ... ); rather than many separate modules? Anyway, CPAN is very ad-hoc. People will discover your module if it has good docs, so there's no need to worry too much about the name. Good code speaks for itself ;) (Who would guess that "Angerwhale" is blogging software or that "Catalyst" is a web framework? Hopefully nobody, but both have quite a few users.) Regards, Jonathan Rockway
