3 ms·
If you think Perl 5 is still where it was a decade ago when Perl 6 got started, you might be interested in looking at Moose. It's an awesome, robust OO system,
by jleader 14y ago
If you think Perl 5 is still where it was a decade ago when Perl 6 got started, you might be interested in looking at Moose. It's an awesome, robust OO system, with a fully thought-out MOP and quite clean syntax. It's pretty mature, but still evolving. It's also managed to preserve the ability to play nicely with existing Perl class hierarchies.
Not to mention that every package on CPAN gets it unit tests run against every version of Perl, on a bunch of different OSes (Linux, OS/X, Windows, Cygwin, several flavors of BSD, Solaris, once in a while more obscure Unices), with the test results all readily browsable several ways (see the "CPAN Testers" line, for example on http://search.cpan.org/~ether/Moose-2.0801/ http://search.cpan.org/~ether/Moose-2.0801/). It's not just "more modules", it's being able to read reviews of them, look at their unit test results, even a dependency browser (http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=Moose;perl=latest http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=Moose;perl=latest) that will combine the unit test stats for all of a module's dependencies.
</fanboy>
- fuzzix 14y agoCompare this with Rubygems - the only test results I see for that ecosystem are the many recent remote shell exploits showing up on seclists.org. Even Pypi doesn't really compare with CPAN. They've done good work there but the simple idea of author names and source archives on a file server you can builds tools around has proved more robust and extensible than a focus on the web services and tools upfront.