On 19 October 2013 08:53, Caleb Cushing <xenoterrac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyone have any opinions on a namespace for roles that just do > requires()? (and/or maybe do full signatures with an around). > Role:: seems acceptable for this purpose imo. Just because a Role has no implementation details other than requires doesn't make it lesser than a role. And there are already some roles in that namespace that do just that: https://metacpan.org/source/RJBS/Role-HasPayload-0.006/lib/Role/HasPayload.pm You *may* want to use something else if you want to clarify that your role will only ever be used for "interface" style composition, but I personally think that overkill. Role::API::Foo or Interface::Foo , both are really the same thing as Role::Foo -- Kent
