good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Can you give an example where this makes sense?
When one wants to use such functions without instantiating an object first. But I guess one can use class methods (as per your definition) and *make sure* to consume the 1st param which will be the classname. I think this might sabotage many patterns like sub-classing...You mean because staticfunc will not be seen in a sub-class unless you do both: use base 'Class'; and use Class; ? I guess yes that's a problem. I took a quick glimpse into static functions for C++ and Java and they look very much like class methods to me.Yes, except that they don't mess with the parameters to provide a classname. Do you suggest that there is no use-case for staticfunc(), but instead convert it into a class method and consume the 1st param, in order to provide accessing it without instantiation first? OK, fine. But I think it is important to provide access to such methods which do not need the state and can be called without instantiating a dummy object first which will be of no use whatsoever. So I think what I posted is useful, but I can edit it to use class methods when this dialogue ends. bw, bliako In reply to Re^3: Procedural vs OOP modules
by bliako
|
|