SPUG: Re: Using mkpath (was: HTTP::Cookies question)

dancerboy dancerboy at strangelight.com
Fri Mar 1 15:12:23 CST 2002

At 10:59 am -0800 3/1/02, Richard Anderson wrote:
>Thanks for the correction.  Since File::Path is part of the standard Perl
>distribution and is five years old, I would have expected accurate

Nitpick:  the documentation is not *inaccurate*, it's simply 
*incomplete*.  File::Path behaves exactly as documented -- the 
documentation just doesn't specify what happens upon failure.

>     Is this (I hope) an aberration or are module users expected to
>scan the source code before using a module?

It's an aberration in the sense that the documentation certainly 
*ought* to specify mkpath's behaviour upon failure.  OTOH, given that 
we live in an imperfect world, part of a developer's job is to notice 
when documentation leaves certain behaviours unspecified, and to plan 
accordingly.  One doesn't need to scan the source code to be aware 
that, based only on the documentation, one has no idea what happens 
when mkpath is unable to create the desired path.


 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     POST TO: spug-list at pm.org       PROBLEMS: owner-spug-list at pm.org
      Subscriptions; Email to majordomo at pm.org:  ACTION  LIST  EMAIL
  Replace ACTION by subscribe or unsubscribe, EMAIL by your Email-address
 For daily traffic, use spug-list for LIST ;  for weekly, spug-list-digest
     Seattle Perl Users Group (SPUG) Home Page: http://seattleperl.org

More information about the spug-list mailing list