Re^3: mro's which to use for flexibility?

Your code is highly confused, or at least does not highlight where the problem you describe is.

BEGIN{unshift @ISA,"TorClient";}

our $mp = Data::Vars->new();
P "main::ISA=%s", \@ISA;
$mp->trm_open('trm', 'localhost:1024');
[download]

The altering of @ISA only alters @main::ISA, but the class you're dealing with is of type Data::Vars, whose inheritance you have not altered at all.

I suggest you learn about namespaces and importing subroutines instead of trying to solve problems by abusing inheritance.

What prevents you from writing a class My::TorClient, which defines all the methods you want?

Update: Also see Aggregation, which points to Object composition, and Moose::Manual::Roles. But I think in the end you will be much better served by writing simple subroutines that call the functions you want to call.

Comment on Re^3: mro's which to use for flexibility? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: mro's which to use for flexibility? by perl-diddler (Chaplain) on Feb 07, 2016 at 11:56 UTC
Ah... you are right about confused, but I question your usage of highly. I.e.: `our $mp = __PACKAGE__->Data::Vars::new();` [download] Now on to the next problem. You see, this is a 6 year old program that I've been trying to modernize and re-factor over time. At one point everything was in MyBigOne::TorClient -- and it was unmaintainable spaghetti with little ability for extension. I needed it to be extensible, Talk to multiple TorClients, Multiple Trackers Multiple TID's... Multiple and different instances of each type of object. Anyway, as 1 module, it was a mess. Switch parsing was done manually, was a mess. So I started trying to break things into logical boundaries... This code was so old it used almost none of my newer routines that simplify things. But when you mentioned DV -- I thought it shouldn't even be trying to go there...why? Cuz it wasn't called via the parent-module name. Sigh. Thanks!	[reply] [d/l]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: mro's which to use for flexibility?
by perl-diddler (Chaplain) on Feb 07, 2016 at 11:56 UTC

Ah... you are right about confused, but I question your usage of highly. I.e.:

our $mp = __PACKAGE__->Data::Vars::new();
[download]

Now on to the next problem.

You see, this is a 6 year old program that I've been trying to modernize and re-factor over time. At one point everything was in MyBigOne::TorClient -- and it was unmaintainable spaghetti with little ability for extension.

I needed it to be extensible, Talk to multiple TorClients, Multiple Trackers Multiple TID's... Multiple and different instances of each type of object.

Anyway, as 1 module, it was a mess. Switch parsing was done manually, was a mess. So I started trying to break things into logical boundaries... This code was so old it used almost none of my newer routines that simplify things.

But when you mentioned DV -- I thought it shouldn't even be trying to go there...why? Cuz it wasn't called via the parent-module name.

[reply]
[d/l]