[lug] can't make this stuff up, folks...

[Zan Lynx]

On 10/17/09 9:12 AM, Tkil wrote:
>>>>>> "David" == David L Anselmi<anselmi at anselmi.us>  writes:
>
> David>  I see a lot of "why use a library that I can write myself"
> David>  coding.  I don't know whether good libraries are that hard to
> David>  come by.
>
> I wrote a blurb on this topic a few years ago...
>
>    http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl/?node_id=359220
>
> (It makes a bit more sense if you already know that CPAN is the
> "Comprehensive Perl Archive Network", the collection of perl libraries
> that people have contributed over the last 20 years or so.  In this
> context, "use CPAN" means "don't code it yourself, use a library".
> The whole thread has some interesting points to make, but here's my
> take on why there's not as much library use as there "should" be:)

A major reason I am often reluctant to use CPAN is that it makes a Perl 
script that much harder to move between machines. Now, instead of 
copying the script, I have to make sure all its dependencies are also 
installed.

Also, using CPAN (the CPAN module that is) at all has, in my experience, 
completely destroyed the ability to use Perl on RPM based systems. Its 
disregard of any packaging structure and its desire to upgrade anything 
and everything and to do it unreproducably (seems to come out 
differently on each system), is a major hazard.

When all that is considered, it is MUCH easier and safer to hack up my 
own email message parser if I only need a quick 80-90% solution.

I will use CPAN code when I really need it, and then I use the 
CPAN-to-RPM packaging stuff.
-- 
Zan Lynx
zlynx at acm.org

"Knowledge is Power.  Power Corrupts.  Study Hard.  Be Evil."