Syntactic Confectionery Delight | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
The “ah ha” is not so much the idea, but how cleanly Moose (and Moose roles) allowed that idea to be expressed in Perl. The speed and reliability of the development was also a nice big win. (Knowing that Perl-6 will be plowing the same furrows, was also nice.) Yes, you're right: there aren't so many great new ideas in this world; just good, serviceable implementations of them that are found to be suitable to a particular occasion. To say that “a very great deal of” programming is devoted to representational-changes ... that is an understatement! I've dealt with many applications that were positively tied-into-knots not only by the data representation but by its architecture. Apps (especially web apps built by amateurs in Drupal ... ;-) ) just sorta “start down the primrose path” of what is euphemistically but accurately called CRUD, evolving without a particular plan until ... wham! ... someone, for a perfectly legitimate and important reason, needs to restructure the database. You know the drill. We all talk about “object-oriented programming” and data representations, and of course I'm very much talking about the selfsame thing here. The implementation was fast and clean and reliable, partly because so much of it could be “out of sight out of mind,” and these design ideas, instead of making the code-modules cruftier and more complicated, actually improved< them. I could have done the thing in “traditional Perl,” but this was, in my opinion, substantially better. In reply to Re^2: Reflections on the design of a pure-Moose web app...
by sundialsvc4
|
|