On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 02:09:46PM -0500, Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:
> Excerpts from Dmitry Karasik's message of Wed Jan 13 13:50:45 -0500 2010:
> > It's just, if I can't help, I don't criticize, especially if wasn't
> > asked.
>
> You still aren't getting it. I (and several other people here) *can* help. I
> don't *want* to help because this is a *bad idea* (built on top of another bad
> idea, auto_deref, but we're already stuck with that one).
You see, "bad" is subjective here, unless you want to persuade me that TMTOWTDI
is bad too. I cook my object accessors the way *I* like them, raw and dangerous
:), and even though I agree that this liking is subjective as well, I'm totally
uninterested in discussing my own programming style. As well as tabs vs spaces,
camelCase, or what not.
By the same argument I don't judge if auto_deref is a bad idea or not, it's
yours
invention. I can't care less if it's bad or not, I'm not using it anyway.
My point is, if Moose can't do what I want, I'm fine, please give me a link
where I can fill a feature request and be done with it. If it can, then please
give me a short answer, "you write such and such", thank you, problem solved.
> People give help here because it is fun to help someone else build something
> beautiful. Criticism of your design is an inextricable part of that. If you
> wanted unconditional help with implementing bad ideas, you came to the wrong
> place.
Helping is fun with criticism, I got it already. But thank you for clarifying.
> I pointed you at the modules that implement the code you'd need to change.
> You
> have access to the source code. Any solution you come up with will be ugly
> and
> fragile, and if a future Moose upgrade breaks it, you will get to keep both
> halves.
Thank you, I'll look at these modules.
--
Sincerely,
Dmitry Karasik
