Sorry about the anonymous bit - I thought I'd logged in. | [reply] |
grantm,
Yesterday I searched cpan for xml and noticed XML::Simpler thinking it was real. Today XML::Simpler? comes along. After reading through this thread a thought occurred to me. You've answered the complaints about this joke module with several apologies and seem to agree with most of the criticism. Since entirely deleting modules is impossible (?) why not update the module to a new version that really does what its name suggests?
As an XML newbie two problems that plagued me were 1. killing the parser with bad input, and 2. getting back a different character encoding than was input. Perhaps you could come up with some mechanism for helping newbies solve the common XML problems. Maybe it could be a "tutorial module" with training wheels like helpful die messages and suggestions for correcting the errors, explaining the subtle gotchas of XML parsing. After which they'd be ready to graduate to XML::Simple (which btw I've used in all my XML scripts thus far, listed in my sig).
Thanks for reading this far, and for XML::Simple!
--
Check out my Perlmonks Related Scripts like framechat,
reputer, and xNN.
| [reply] |
Since entirely deleting modules is impossible (?)
No, it's not impossible -
XML::Simpler
is no longer on CPAN. If you install modules using CPAN.pm, then it will tell you there is no module by that name in any
of the distributions on CPAN. Sure, if you search CPAN in
other ways (such as the excellent
search.cpan.org then you will find
links to modules that no longer exist or have been renamed -
but that problem is hardly limited to XML::Simpler.
Perhaps you could come up with [...snip...]
a "tutorial module" ...
As it happens, I have 'come up with' the
Perl XML FAQ. As
time permits, I intend to expand the concept into a CPAN
distribution XML::FAQ which includes lots of sample code.
two problems that plagued me were 1. killing the parser with bad input...
Covered here.
... and 2. getting back a different character encoding than was input
Covered here.
| [reply] |
As far as I can tell, the key difference between previous ones (eg: Sex, DNA, Bleach, Buffy) and mine was that XML::Simpler did not contain obfuscated Perl code.
That's not the point. "Sex" is obviously not serious, DNA is useable, and the synopsis makes clear it's just for fun. Both Bleach and Buffy are in the Acme:: namespace, home of useless, but fun modules.
XML::Simpler is in the XML:: namespace, and will be found when anyone searches for XML or XML::Simple. A lot of people want ease of use, and will install XML::Simpler before trying XML::Simple. They'll find out it's useless and might give up on trying other modules, because even the simplest doesn't work.
Had you named it Acme::XML::Simpler, there would be no problem.
As modules can't be deleted easily, I urge you to add a very verbose and clear statement at the top of your POD, add a warning to the code itself, and release version 1.01. Then, request it to be deleted, and if you like, re-submit it under the Acme:: namespace.
I would argue that mine is no more or less useful than the other packages. It does work exactly as the documentation describes.
Have you seen my latest module?
package Null;
use v5.6.0
use strict;
our $VERSION = '1.00';
__END__
=head1 NAME
Null - Does absolutely nothing
=head1 SYNOPSIS
use Null;
=head1 DESCRIPTION
This module only sets $Null::VERSION, but does nothing else.
=head1 COPYRIGHT
None is claimed. This module is released into the public domain.
=cut
This module (though untested) does _EXACTLY_ that what is documented. But it should NOT be in CPAN.
U28geW91IGNhbiBhbGwgcm90MTMgY
W5kIHBhY2soKS4gQnV0IGRvIHlvdS
ByZWNvZ25pc2UgQmFzZTY0IHdoZW4
geW91IHNlZSBpdD8gIC0tIEp1ZXJk
| [reply]
[d/l] |
| [reply] |
