Well, the two files in question are not huge. They each have one
class. What's the difference between require-ing them later, and
use-ing them later? Why is it more difficult to require them?
I don't think it's more difficult to call a require(), use() helps in
the bigger scheme of things, like determining the scope of your
variables and methods, and making sure you package similar functions
together. use() also makes sure at compile time that the libraries are
available, whereas require() only checks at runtime.
There's more to the difference between the two, and you may want to read
up the documentation for the details. It seems that best practices go
strongly with use(), and a lot of add-on support are based on that style
of development.
I will say that this is not a Perl-thing, but rather a good general
software development mindset.
Thanks, but this does seem like a Perl-thing. No other language
distinguishes between 'package-in-a-file' and 'module'.
I would say ASP, but ASP does not have a concept of a module...
In my previous email, I was assuming that you simply split all the
functions in into 2 files without using packages, and merging them with
a require(). If you are already using packages, then go for use().
_______________________________________________
Perl-Win32-Users mailing list
Perl-Win32-Users@listserv.ActiveState.com
To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs
