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
>documentation.
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.
-jason
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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