At 03:19 PM 1/11/2006 -0800, Lyle Kopnicky wrote: >Well, that's what I have right now. Two packages, each in their own >file. Each one is a class. But they are '.pl' files. Is there any >reason to make them '.pm' files? I don't see why I would want to export >anything from them.
Then I guess for ur purposes it's just a semantics/personal preference difference. A require is basically just a do in this case and if ur using that to just fire off "giant subroutines" then making a module won't buy u much. The use package syntax is really there to give u much more control over the process than what a do can provide. It's just a cleaner safer method IMHO. >The 'server/' path is necessary, since it's relative to the current >directory, not the location of 'V-Res.pl'. Then, within >'V-Res-TicketQueue.pl', I have: > > require 'server/V-Res-TicketSubQueue.pl'; > >So, how would I make these into modules? Suppose I just rename them >with '.pm' extensions. Then, In 'server/V-Res.pl', I could write: use lib 'server'; use TicketQueue; >because it wouldn't like the dashes. Perhaps I could rename the file to >just 'TicketQueue.pm'. Or I could make a VRes folder, then put >'TicketQueue.pm' inside of it? Then I'd have to change the package name >to VRes::TicketQueue. It seems u've alreay dug urself into too deep a hole to make it much worth it to try to dig urself out. ;) In the future, when u want to make a true function library, u can start using modules. I call a do a "dumb" external execute and a use a "smart" external execute. -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede malis" 00000100 _______________________________________________ Perl-Win32-Users mailing list Perl-Win32-Users@listserv.ActiveState.com To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs
