Re: use base peculiarities

[Gurusamy Sarathy <gsar@ActiveState.com>]

On 19 Jan 2000 22:49:29 +0100, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 11:27:02 -0700, Tom Christiansen <tchrist@chthon.perl.com> sai
>d:
>
> > Why does base.pm not use %ISA to decide whether to require?  Why
>
>You mean @ISA, not %ISA, right?

I think he did mean %ISA.

> > Another issue beyond the peculiar disregard for %INC is that base.pm
> > conflates the notion of "base package" with physical files in its
> > cavalier assumption that every base package must be in its own file.
> > For example, this doesn't allow for the fact that one file may
> > simultaneously define symbols in multiple package namespaces, as
> > we see in Tie/Hash.pm, or as was whilom seen in IO/Socket.pm
> > defining IO::Socket::{INET,UNIX}.
>
>The disregard of %INC is due to the very fact that you describe.
>*Because* a "base package" doesn't imply the existance of a physical
>file, base.pm cannot take %INC into account.

But that doesn't help, because we ass_u_me a physical file when we do
a C<require "$base"> anyway!


Sarathy
gsar@ActiveState.com

---

Follow-Ups from:

Mark-Jason Dominus <mjd@plover.com>
andreas.koenig@anima.de (Andreas J. Koenig)
andreas.koenig@anima.de (Andreas J. Koenig)

References to:

andreas.koenig@anima.de (Andreas J. Koenig)

---

[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Top&Search][Original]

---