Automatic dependencies

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 01:01:40AM -0400, Peter Lobsinger wrote:
> > ... if we read
> > "use File::Temp;" at the beginning and the program is compiled successfully,
> > then there is a good reason to treat the module File/Temp.pm as a static
> > dependency.
> 
> You've chosen a good example to prove that seemingly-static HLL
> dependancies are indeed dynamic. As I understand it, Perl 6 modules
> are not tied to the filesystem in such an intuitive way. They may be
> name-mangled or managed through a registry of some sort. "use
> File::Temp" looks up whatever your system considers to be the default
> implementation of File::Temp (there may be different versions by
> different authors). 

I totally agree with Peter and others here; one should not consider 
"use File::Temp" as being a static dependency.

Overall, I don't believe a static module analysis tool should be 
embedded in PCT, I suspect it wants to be layered on top of PCT
as a library of some sort that languages can easily share.  (The
library could be considered part of PCT, but this wouldn't require
modification of PCT itself.)

I'd also like more details of how the proposed system would
integrate or make use of the items described in pdd31.

Pm