Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Keep It Simple, Stupid

Re: Re: Re: Why breaking can() is acceptable

by hardburn (Abbot)
on Apr 06, 2004 at 14:32 UTC ( #342935=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Re: Why breaking can() is acceptable
in thread Why breaking can() is acceptable

how do you handle syntactic-sugar methods that are instance-specific?

That is something that probably comes down to a case-by-case basis, so I don't want to give any hard rules on it. What I do want is to stop people from using AUTOLOAD to handle accessors/mutators when other solutions are available. This seems to be the most common use of AUTOLOAD, and it needs to stop. (Please direct flames twards tchrist :)

: () { :|:& };:

Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why breaking can() is acceptable
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Apr 06, 2004 at 14:33 UTC
    What about soft rules? :-)

    We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

    Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://342935]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (2)
As of 2023-04-02 02:03 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found