> It's necessary because by calling "bless" you are doing what
> should have
> been done in the missing object constructor I mentioned
> above. You are
> taking the reference and placing it in a different namespace (the
> My::Table::HTML namespace). Once you've done that, calls to
> the object will
> search the new namespace for methods, and hence your
> dostuff() method is discovered.
Is there anything wrong with this (other than calling it a subclass :) ?
> I think someone else mentioned that you are probably not
> really wanting a
> subclass. I believe he is correct.
Yep, I used misleading terminology. I'm not really looking for a subclass.
> It appears that you
> could probably be
> working on something like this:
>
> use My::Table;
> $T = new My::Table;
> # here would be methods to fill the table with data
> $T->title("Test");
> # output the table
> $T->output('HTML');
>
> # in package My::Table
>
> sub output {
> my($self, $format_method) = @_;
> # this dynamically loads and instantiates the correct formatter
> object. If you pass in "HTML", you get a
> # My::Table::HTML object, etc.
> require "My/Table/" . $format_method . ".pm";
> my $formatter = "My::Table::$format_method"->new();
> #note that the
> formatter class must have a constructor named
> #"new"
> $formatter->dostuff();
> }
I am doing something similar (I'm exec()ing a 'use' instead of require.
Require is probably cleaner).
But what I _can't_ do is "My::Table::$format_method"->new(); because the
object I want to dostuff() with is the existing My::Table object, not a new
object from the sub-package.
> I really recommend you read the perltoot man page for more info on
> subclassing. It may help clear things up. OO in Perl is
> great and powerful
> stuff, but it's not as structured (i.e., _regimented_) as
> most other OO
> languages, so it's easy to misunderstand what needs to be
> done.
Believe me, I've reviewed and re-reviewed perltoot, but it just doesn't
cover what I'm trying to do.
> In this
> case, however, it appears to be a case of the wrong tool for
> the job. A
> subclass is not necessarily what you want.
I'm in agreement here. I just don't know if there's a "proper" OO way to do
what I'm trying to do.
--
Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet Systems Architect User Technology Associates, Inc.
$_=q;KvtuyboopuifeyQQfeemyibdlfee;; y.e.s. ;y+B-x+A-w+s; ;y;y; ;;print;;
_______________________________________________
Perl-Win32-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs
