in reply to (jeffa) Re: RFC: CGI::Tables
in thread RFC: CGI::Tables
<rant>
Some people will naturally like templates better. That's fine, but let's ignore that at the moment, because I personally don't care much for them. They have their place, but most of the time it's not with me.
Where is the best place to put a module like this? I see them in all different namespaces: DBIx, HTML, Table, Text, CGI. Where would it actually belong? If it's made more generic with different output options? What if you decide you want to expand it with other HTML functions? This is a general problem with CPAN, I think. Reusable code doesn't fit well in a hierarchy.
Now what if different people have different ideas of what a good interface would be? The first module claims a good name, and the second really has no place.
Suppose, for instance that I decide I don't like the way CGI.pm works. I decide that I want to redesign it. Sure, reinventing the wheel can be bad, but there's always the possibility of improvement. What would I name my module?
</rant>
It's really hard to find the right module sometimes. Too hard. I suppose it's even harder to write one.
elusion : http://matt.diephouse.com
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: Re: (jeffa) Re: RFC: CGI::Tables
by markjugg (Curate) on May 08, 2003 at 01:49 UTC | |
by elusion (Curate) on May 08, 2003 at 02:14 UTC | |
by jeffa (Bishop) on May 08, 2003 at 05:02 UTC | |
by markjugg (Curate) on May 08, 2003 at 02:31 UTC |