On Dec 20, 2003, at 12:31 PM, R. Joseph Newton wrote: [..]
It might be worth a trip to the archives to review this thread.
Joseph
for those following along at home:
<http://coding.derkeiler.com/Archive/Perl/perl.beginners/2003-10/ 0708.html>
being the thread I think Joseph is referring to...
which references
<http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=52089>
return bless { me => 'father' }, $haveSin";
thank you for the references. good point on the 'clone' v. 'new' class method argument.
I will confess to having cargo culted it from the POD without worrying about the details.
Since I can not come up with a good argument why I would want someone passing me a 'reference' to the class, the old stand bye of
my $proto = shift;
my $class = ref($proto) || $proto;is not something that I will be advocating.
I'd say that about 90% of the time I am using an OO-ish style it is for the blessed reference to a function, hence either a named function in the module, or something that it inherited, in it's super class. so the
my $baz = new Foo::Bar::Baz;
my @got_back = $baz->method_here(@arglist);
allows me to not have to remember if it is in Baz.pm or one of the super's. Even IF in that specific instance I could have done just as well with
my @got_back = Foo::Bar::Baz->method_here(@arglist);
and in some places I do that, because it helps remind me where I stashed the function...
But I tend to get to Modules based upon the 'things worth keeping and re-using' rather than the BDUF approach of
well we need a Base Class that is wide enough
to allow the following Sub Classes which ....
ciao drieux
---
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
