On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 21:26:19 +0000 Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 10:27:23AM -0800, _brian_d_foy wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Hendrik Van > > Belleghem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I' writing a module that basically access a Connectix/Logitech > > > QuickCam. I checked with rhizo's #perl and the perlmonks CB for a > > > good name for the module and came up with Device::QuikCam. Any > > > feedback would be helpfull :) > > > > i don't have any problem with that name. > > I don't either, much, except to wonder if there's a typo - QuikCam vs > QuickCam. > > But I wonder whether Device:: would end up becoming a bit of a mess > unless we consistently add more sub-categories. > > So far we have Device::ParallelPort::*, Device::ISDN::*, > Device::Modem::*. I think we should continue in that direction. Someone on IRC suggested something in that direction as well. The big question here is, what sub-category? Device::Camera:: ? Device::Webcam:: ? Ofcourse it's a parallel device (well mine is anyway), so Device::ParallelPort::Camera:: etc would also apply more or less. I'm open for ideas and have no problem with changing names if required (well, the module, not my own name ofcourse). To reply to that i vs R thing, yes indeed, altho I had some discussions on IRC and in CB about it prior to starting development :) and the time it took from start to current R wasn't that long. --- Greetz Hendrik ... Quidquid perl dictum sit, altum viditur.
