| Module Info
| Add a review of xsub
Very neat! I do like the elegance of the small size, and
looking at your other modules and this one, you have good
ideas and are capable of implementing them. I do have to agree
that a lot more people would have a lot more fun with this
module if you *cough* documented it. The chorus here is usually
that a few implementations are okey - people will pick the
best one - and a module that is smaller, simplified, specialized,
better maintained, or has some other advantage - offers a useful
alternative. Usually there is only griping when a large number
of people suddenly think it would be spiffy to do their own
version of X, and this has certainly happened a few times.
I think you've just gotten on peoples bad side for the lack
of POD. If you search Google, there are a few very quick,
very simple quick references, and what h2xs spits out is
adequate to learn enough to fake it enough to be useful. I'm
not sure I like where this flogging people in public thing
is going on cpanratings.perl.org, so I've gone through and
given all of my modules bad reviews. Bwahaha! Buck the system!
Hope this helps! -scott
Even though I'm chiming in with the rest - "if the author did not care to even add some simple documentation, what support can you expect otherwise?"
A module without even a tagline, a lowercase toplevel name - this is bad form.
It may well be true that this module is useful, but it's impossible to know as it has no documentation other than this line in the README - "lightweight replacement for .xs files, similar to Inline::C". That's it. That's the whole documentation set for the module. How is anyone supposed to use it based on that? Also, it has no tests and it uses a "pragmatic" (i.e. lower case) name. This is the kind of distribution that shouldn't be on CPAN in my opinion.
If you're going to gratuitously reinvent a wheel, at least make it round instead of square. And, of course, all the things everyone else has said - no docs, at all, no not one (I wonder what possesses people to upload things without documentation when every other CPAN module is documented and every guide to putting modules together talks about the value of documentaiton.) badly named, etc. Some of the hard-coded compile options in the source also suggest the author has little experience dealing with compilers that aren't gcc.
I wrote this about 3 years ago and it has proven useful in many of the other modules I've recently begun contributing. Like Iain says, it's a badly done version of Inline::C. Its artistic value lies in its small size (200 lines), malleability, and ease of use (see my packages autobless, wildproto, and vm for some examples). I've long been suspicious of it outliving its usefulness, but it's worked just fine for me from perl-5.6.0 up to the present time with little maintenance, so I decided to publish it. So take it for what it's worth; hopefully not 0!
A badly done version of Inline::C with no docs. Makes me wonder if any of the guides on writing modules for CPAN were read by the author. Also makes me wish I could vote '0'.
There is no documentation or test script included with the distribution. It also uses a top level namespace when it doesn't appear to be warranted. It also uses a an all-lowercase module name, which are typically reserved for pragmas.