use B for detecting methods rather than Moose #8
Conversation
Rather than using Moose, and protected by a Test::Needs check, use B to check the package of subs to detect if they are methods. Since we aren't using Moose to create anything in the test, we don't need to care about any of Moose's own tracking or other things it cares about like roles. We only are using it to check is the package name attached to the sub. This can be done directly with B. This allows dropping the hard dependency on Test::Needs, and always run this test.
|
I think the intent of using Moose in tests was that so the method was not the same as what was being done in code (which already uses |
|
The code checking When the test was written, it was just using code from Test::CleanNamespaces to get the list of methods. At the time, Test::CleanNamespaces always used Moose to get its understanding of what a method was. I don't think that was due to any attempt to use a specific type of implementation, just what was available at the time. In the end, for anything not installed via Moose's meta layer (which this is not doing) Moose is just doing the same check of the package name attached to the sub. So it could pretty much also be called "the same way". I would really like for Class::Method::Modifiers to only use core prereqs. The largest user of Class::Method::Modifiers is Moo, and this and PR#7 are last extraneous prereqs in Moo's dependency tree. |
Rather than using Moose, and protected by a Test::Needs check, use B to check the package of subs to detect if they are methods.
Since we aren't using Moose to create anything in the test, we don't need to care about any of Moose's own tracking or other things it cares about like roles. We only are using it to check is the package name attached to the sub. This can be done directly with B. This allows dropping the hard dependency on Test::Needs, and always run this test.