New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Make Inline::Module::MakeMaker be more OO #8
Comments
If it's a proper MakeMaker extension, you don't need to do anything other than loading it. |
It's not a MakeMaker extension. Should it be? Can you give me an example EUMM extension that fixes up the Makefile? FWIW, I'm not tied to any specific implementation. I've already refactored a few times. Willing to keep changing things until it is right. |
Why would you want to fix up the Makefile? Why not write a correct one the first time? Postambles are used by hundreds of modules, that way you don't need to fix anything. The |
Can you give me an example module that adds a postamble? I'll check if I can do it all in a postamble. |
Module with a postamble: https://metacpan.org/source/ETJ/Gimp-2.31/Makefile.PL |
I meant that I want to see a module that one would use in a Makefile.PL that adds a postamble. (Not a module dist with a Makefile.PL that adds a postamble directly). |
@ingy I asked you a few days ago why you weren't using a postamble, showing On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 6:04 PM, mohawk2 notifications@github.com wrote:
|
FWIW, a postamble is just appending stuff to a Makefile. It's not that big of a deal. All I'm doing now is appending to the Makefile (and changing 'distdir :' to 'distdir ::'). I'll be glad to use a postamble technique if it's not a pita, but this isn't really buying us much. @karenetheridge I can't locate your example. URL please? |
My own example would be this. |
Let me change the tune here. We are all not on the same page. Here is the current Makefile.PL API: https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Inline-Module/lib/Inline/Module/Tutorial.pod#The-Makefile.PL Whatever we settle on internally, I don't want that API to become worse. It's a clean API, and I'm happy to make it cleaner, but not happy to make it worse. All I've suggested so far is to change I just looked at @Leont 's example, and it looks worth checking out, but I'm not sure it will work out. @Leont , can one use several modules like yours to add several postambles? |
@Leont , I got some time to look at your module, and while it is reasonable, it doesn't allow for multiple modules of that style. In other words, if I did it that way, people couldn't use both of our modules. That is one of the reasons I went to the current FixMakefile thing. It plays well with others. The other reason is that I can't do all I need in a postamble. See '::' thing above. |
I:M:MM is OO now. So closing this. People can continue to comment on the |
You can, as described in the docs. There is a
Which is nonsense. |
FixMakefile is an export. It should create a module for state and then call:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: