OK, so I just responded a message where I said: > Oh, but wait, look at the second case in the code I sent (copied below). > The 'att1' attribute is redefined with > > has 'att1' => (isa => 'Str'), > > and yet the 'after' modifiers of both parent and child classes are > triggered (?!).
And, as it is wont to happen, I realized how this might be so as soon as I had clicked the 'send' button, grr. So if an attribute is defined without an 'is' option, no accessors will be generated, as the documentation says somewhere. But then, if in a subclass and attribute is redefined in that way, it looks like the accessors of the superclass are still used for the subclass, and with them, the method modifiers? My head hurts :-) Bernardo
