On 22/03/11 14:55, Brad Bowman wrote:
"brian d foy"<[email protected]> wrote:
[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see the "To," "Cc," and
"Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
In article<[email protected]>, Perl Authors
Upload Server<[email protected]> wrote:
The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module List:
modid: Data::Tweak DSLIP: cdphp description: tweak nested
data with composable changes userid: BOWMANBS (Brad Bowman)
It seems that "nested" and "composable" are more important than "tweak".
Should those appear in the name somehow?
While important, "nested" and "composable" are very abstract features
that can apply to lots of scenarios. I mulled on the name for a
while and think Data::Overlay is better. It has the same
advantages as "tweak" (except obscurity) and is more suggestive of
non-mutating changes.
There's also a draft version at:
https://pause.perl.org/pub/PAUSE/authors/id/B/BO/BOWMANBS/Data-Overlay-0.51-TRIAL.tar.gz
My tweak advantages, for context:
I like "tweak" because it can be the verb (exported sub unlikely to
collide) and a noun to refer to the change object thing. It is a bit more
cutesy than practical though.
I was partly making this submission to get "dibs" on the name,
does it work that way?
Thanks,
Brad
