Chisel Wright wrote:
> The module in question appears to use UNIVERSAL::can()
UNIVERSAL:can is evil and should be killed with fire. :-)
> but I'm not sure why this has far reaching effects out to the Template code.
It monkey-patches the UNIVERSAL module (from which everything inherits)
and implements an all-the-world-is-OO policy - "Though shalt not call can()
as a function" - which invalidates perfectly valid non-OO Perl.
From 'perldoc UNIVERSAL' in Perl 5.8.8
"can" can be called as a class (static) method, an object method,
or a function.
When this last came up, I cited the above Perl documentation as proof that
it was officially OK to call can() as a function.
http://london.pm.org/pipermail/london.pm/Week-of-Mon-20071119/011479.html
So then they changed the documentation...
From 'perldoc UNIVERAL' in Perl 5.10.0
You may call "can" as a class (static) method or an object method.
That said, there are good reasons why it's *generally* not a good idea to
do so, and there are now better ways to do it. However, that doesn't work
in all cases. In particular, the CGI module is a problem because of its
two-faced procedural/OO interfaces. It's a few years since I looked at it,
so things may have changed, but back then the only way I could make TT Do
The Right Thing was to call UNIVERSAL::can() as a function.
It's like using goto. Yes, it's generally a bad idea, except when you really
do know enough about what you're doing to recognise that it's the best
solution. UNIVERSAL::can() decides in its infinite wisdom that I don't know
what I'm doing and should be chastised for it. Bah!
> I've attached a patch written against Template-Toolkit-2.20.
No you haven't :-)
Before you re-send it, can you confirm that all the tests pass with the
patch in. If they do then I have no objection to the patch in principle.
But I've got a nasty suspicion that there may be problems...
A
_______________________________________________
templates mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.template-toolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/templates
