From: "Richard Dice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In almost any other mainstream language other than > Perl no-one would ever want to try to do what you want, nor would they even > *contemplate* being able to do this, because the underlying implementation is so > opaque to derived classes that there's basically no way to get at the underlying > data structure.
Thanks Richard. What I was trying to get at is why can't an object I am subclassing (like C::A) give me a contract for accessing its methods and variables. But, let me use $self any way I want (since I'm extending that base)? Here's another way I'm seeing it: I can't access $self to store my own variables (I have to use "param"). But, I can define my own methods and call them as $self->method_name(). Now, why can I freely extend the base object this way (without going through a mechanism provided by the base object)? But, I can't do it when it involves instance variables? Is this just a matter of how Perl works? Perl accomodates adding methods? But not variables? I wish I understood OO better. It just seems like there should be a way to add my own instance variables to self without being so dependent upon the base object *similar* to how I can add my own methods. Or, are you going to tell me I shouldn't add my own methods either? Thanks, Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=cgiapp&r=1&w=2 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
