Re: Perl Factory Method Pattern?

CPAN is no more an external dependancy than is having the right version of libc or the latest security patches to SSH...you have to be able to deal with these things. Plus, you can always download/install a local copy to your home directory (or any directory) and check it in to version control if you have a problem with deployment in network-constrainted environments.

as to the OOP question, my stance on design patterns is another story... Dominus is more eloquent than I, and he bites his tongue more too: Design Patterns Aren't

Comment on Re: Perl Factory Method Pattern?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Perl Factory Method Pattern? by hardburn (Abbot) on Oct 11, 2004 at 20:43 UTC
I think you misunderstood MJD's presentation (which is quite common, as he expresses at the addition he made to the end of the talk on the web). MJD is not saying Design Patterns are good or bad. He's saying there is a conflict of terminology, and we may be missing out on some really useful stuff because of it. "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]
Re^3: Perl Factory Method Pattern? by SpanishInquisition (Pilgrim) on Oct 12, 2004 at 13:14 UTC
I understood. "Design Patterns" in the C++ sense is what this post is pretty much about, not "Design Patterns" in the architectural sense. His point about such things being inhuman (first several slides) were right... Agreed, they have value, but they have value in the common terminology sense, i.e. knowing what a Factory is, rather than having the template to implement a Factory.	[reply]


Syntactic Confectionery Delight
	PerlMonks