If using ->params->{name} (i.e. the direct hash approach) is like
juggling grenades - then what is like using the ->param( 'name' ) way
of doing it?
Actually ->params->{name} is the juggling teddybears one (the "proper"
way to do it). If you do $c->{request}->{params}->{name} - that's the
grenade way.
-.param('name') is juggling sharp knives :)
I am asking this because your grenades analogy gives the impression
that you you are against doing direct hash access for every price -
but I think the general advice is that in this particular case using
the ->param( 'name' ) is worse than using the direct hash access.
Sorry if I wasn't quite clear on it, in the specific case of
$c->req->params and consorts, doing $c->req->params->{ ... } is the
"right" way to do it, after all, params returns a hashref and offers no
further encapsulation; using ->req->param('foo') would work, but is just
a compatibility shim for CGI and comes with some major drawbacks.
I was, however, speaking in general; it's often better to be able to do
$object->get_foo/$object->set_foot (or $object->foo which does both),
than to go $object->{foo} = ...;
In some cases, it's not, sometimes you need to get rid of the overhead,
but the common "idea" at that point is that IF you need to break
encapsulation, comment it right, and indicate WHY you're doing it.
--
Ben van Staveren
phone: +62 81 70777529
email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
List: [email protected]
Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
