On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 02:33:14PM -1000, Tim Jenness wrote:
>
> Here is a new test script for Pod::ParseUtils.
>
> I was mainly concerned with the link parsing. There is a good chance that
> Pod::ParseUtils is currently doing the wrong thing in some cases.
>
> Most obvious to me is that
>
>
Here is a new test script for Pod::ParseUtils.
I was mainly concerned with the link parsing. There is a good chance that
Pod::ParseUtils is currently doing the wrong thing in some cases.
Most obvious to me is that
L
does not print "some text". I have not put in a test for that case since
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 03:54:05PM -0600, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Tels wrote:
>
> > > If you would prefer to handle the
> > > ExtUtils::MakeMaker and ExtUtils::MM_* changes yourself let me know.
> >
> > You can do it. I'll wait until the dust settles (I wrote tests for routines
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Tels wrote:
> > If you would prefer to handle the
> > ExtUtils::MakeMaker and ExtUtils::MM_* changes yourself let me know.
>
> You can do it. I'll wait until the dust settles (I wrote tests for routines
> that now get removed, so I am a bit conservative with starting another
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 12:33:30PM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
> Is there a reason for not using the @ISA inheritance mechanism?
In this case, simple delegation works much better. We only need a
handful of File::Spec's interface, the methods are all but deprecated
in MakeMaker, and MM is already c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On 20-Nov-01 Bart Lateur tried to scribble about:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:36:45 +0100 (CET), Tels wrote:
>
>>> sub canonpath {
>>> return File::Spec->canonpath($_[1]);
>>> }
>>
>>I'd written return File::Spec->canonpath(@_); just in case
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On 19-Nov-01 Dave Rolsky tried to scribble about:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2001, Tels wrote:
> Yes, this should be using File::Spec (unless the code in ExtUtils for
> doing these differs in a way that needs to be preserved). I know there
> are some modules out t
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:36:45 +0100 (CET), Tels wrote:
>> sub canonpath {
>> return File::Spec->canonpath($_[1]);
>> }
>
>I'd written return File::Spec->canonpath(@_); just in case ;)
That ain't right. You'll get an extra argument in front (the class
name).
Is there a reason for
