Howdy, > There are a couple of big problems with adopting Moose or one of the similar > redesigns of Perl OO.
You mean "implementing" OO in Perl, but I get it. > > 1. Not every module you're using will be Moose-based, so if you're working > on one of those, you'll need to remember to switch back and forth. It's bad > enough having both (Perl's approximation of) OO and procedural calls. >From what I know (hdp would know much better), Moose can interact just fine with non-Moose modules. For instance, check out MooseX::NonMoose [1]. So, this is false. > > 2. If we bring someone new onto the team we'd have to train them not just in > Perl, but in Moose as well. There are tons of books and online resources > for Perl, but only Moose's own documentation for that. All the examples, > code snippets, books, and howtos that people might want to use would have to > be adapted to fit into a Moose framework. Huh? Moose is 50 times simpler to learn that Perl 5's hacktastic OO implementation. And they would have to write about 50 times less code. And hopefully you are hiring people that "can learn new things." All you have to say is "use Moose's features for creating/maintaining your objects", everything else is the same. > 3. If I am going to change languages, I'd rather switch to Ruby or Python. Moose is still Perl 5! And it will help you transition to Perl 6, if you don't decide to switch to Ruby or Python. Cheers, [1] http://search.cpan.org/~doy/MooseX-NonMoose-0.02/lib/MooseX/NonMoose.pm -- Jonathan Leto jonat...@leto.net http://leto.net
