From: Mike Stok Date: 2002-10-30T11:56:20+09:00 Subject: Re: good link to read as we contemplate RAA, RAA.succ, et al In article , dblack@candle.superlink.net wrote: > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote: >> But as I mentioned, if there's a definitive name, you have to think >> more carefully about why you're writing a different module, and your >> name should reflect what's distinctive about it. Consider >> HTML::Parser, HTML::TokeParser and HTML::TreeBuilder. You can easily tell >> that they're all HTML parsing libraries but they have distinctive styles. > > Then again, if you're writing an HTML parser that does what > HTML::Parser does, but does it (in your opinion) better, or faster, or > whatever, then it's potentially a pain to have to find a synonym or > near-synonym to use as a name. Clearly HTML::MyBetterParser ;-) Using CPAN is much like using Perl, you get so used to the way it works and the bits to avoid that it eventually seems perfectly natural and a reasonable pain / gain tradeoff. ( 1/2 :-) Mike -- mike@stok.co.uk | The "`Stok' disclaimers" apply. http://www.stok.co.uk/~mike/ | GPG PGP Key 1024D/059913DA mike@exegenix.com | Fingerprint 0570 71CD 6790 7C28 3D60 http://www.exegenix.com/ | 75D2 9EC4 C1C0 0599 13DA