On 10/18/2016 04:53 PM, James E Keenan wrote:
> At this point I feel compelled to ask:
>
> Why?
>
> Why do you want to design a library with so many exportable subroutines
> and (worse!) constants?
>
> Now, I concede that the statements above are merely background for your
> questions about circular dependencies. So my questions run the risk of
> sending discussion off in a different direction. And we don't yet have
> your code to look at.
>
> But, on the basis of the experiences of the Perl 5 Porters in
> maintaining POSIX.pm -- which suffers from these problems, see
> http://search.cpan.org/~rjbs/perl-5.24.0/ext/POSIX/lib/POSIX.pod#CAVEATS
> -- I would be reluctant to use any library with a large number of
> exportable symbols and consequent risk of namespace pollution.
Thank you for your reply.
If you can recommend a module included in base Perl that includes the
ASCII character set in the following form, I would be happy to eliminate
128 of my constants:
use constant NUL => chr 0;
use constant SOH => chr 1;
use constant STX => chr 2;
...
use constant DEL => chr 127;
Same for these:
use constant EMPTY_STRING => '';
use constant FALSE => '';
use constant NAMESEP => '::';
use constant TRUE => 1;
use constant UNDEF => undef;
But you asked, "Why?":
2016-10-18 18:20:59 dpchrist@t7400 ~/sandbox/perl
$ cat constants-as-coderefs.pl
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use constant FOO => 'foo';
sub takes_coderef { print $_[0]->(), "\n" }
my $rc = \&FOO;
takes_coderef($rc);
2016-10-18 18:21:02 dpchrist@t7400 ~/sandbox/perl
$ perl constants-as-coderefs.pl
foo
I'm experimenting with ideas from HOP [1], and coderefs are of primary
importance.
David
[1] http://hop.perl.plover.com/
