Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!rutgers!ucsd!pacbell.com!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jpl-devvax!lwall
From: lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.perl
Subject: Re: Proper Use of Packages and Debugging With Same
Keywords: packages debugging
Message-ID: <8753@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Date: 16 Jul 90 19:43:07 GMT
References: <1990Jul12.143602.23401@DRD.Com>
Reply-To: lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 23

In article <1990Jul12.143602.23401@DRD.Com> mark@drd.Com (Mark Lawrence) writes:
: The subject line says it all -- I want to use packages in the way they
: were intended and I'd like to be able to use the debugger in a script
: that uses packages.

I'd like to be able to do that too.  It's on my Todo list, somewhere.

: (The `main' qualifier in gex.pl, BTW, is there on purpose: we actually have
: a package that does this, because of the example with package dumpvar in the 
: Packages section of the man page.  Why use a package if you're not going
: to take advantage of the alternative namespace?  Or am I really
: confused?)

The packaging applies to any variables referenced as well as the subroutine
names, so you might well want to declare main'subroutine in a package that
only wants to make the subroutine name available but not any "local globals".
Abstract types often want to have private data but public operations.

:  "...do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly..." Micah 6:8

I think the last is the hardest.

Larry