Hi all,
Currently in CPAN you have modules like:
Digest::MD5
Digest::SHA
Digest::MD5::Perl
Digest::SHA::PurePerl
The difference is that the first two are implemented in C and the later
two in Perl.
Naming issues are likely to become worse in Perl 6 when we also have
modules that use Parrot. You might have three implementations of
Digest::SHA, one in Perl 6, one that uses Parrot, and one that uses C.
Worse, you might even find a module that depends on both Parrot *and* C.
I think we might need to come up with some sort of standard naming
convention to distinguish dependencies. Something that the *user* can
recognize quickly when he browses CPAN. My first thought was:
P6::Digest::SHA
C::Digest::SHA
Parrot::Digest::SHA
But that does nothing for modules that require both C and Parrot (it
sounds horrendous, but I bet *someone* will do it). And btw, this isn't
just to help users pick the right module. The modules do need different
names to avoid naming conflicts.
One idea is to introduce a non-alphanumeric character to separate
dependencies. For example:
Digest::SHA <-- No dependencies. Just Perl.
Digest::SHA/C <-- Requires C.
Digest::SHA/Parrot <-- Requires Parrot.
Digest::SHA/C/Parrot <-- Requires C and Parrot.
Remember that in Perl 6 modules can be named with any Unicode character,
so "/" is fair game. I am not proposing a change to the language. Just a
naming convention using characters that the language already allows.
There are other possible symbols besides '/'. All in all, I think my
favourite options are (in no particular order):
Digest::SHA/C Digest::SHA/Parrot
Digest::SHA!C Digest::SHA!Parrot
Digest::SHA+C Digest::SHA+Parrot
Digest::SHA.C Digest::SHA.Parrot
Digest::SHA~C Digest::SHA~Parrot
What do you think?
If anyone can think of a symbol that is already used in Perl with a
similar meaning, please let me know.
Daniel.
