Re: (tye)Re: subclass or hooks?

Better yet, the hooks themselves might be implemented in a subclass. I did this once in a project, and it worked beautifully.

Applications were born as functions passed to a ...::Callback class. If the applications were used by many people or grew on popularity, they could become modules very easily. This also allowed for improved tests and better Q&A overall.

Just my $0.02 :)

Comment on Re: (tye)Re: subclass or hooks?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re (tilly) 4: subclass or hooks? by tilly (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2001 at 00:02 UTC
I find your description somewhat unclear. The only thing I have done which kind of fits your description is that I have written code with hooks that are available by subclassing, and then I exported a utility function which could be used to take a few desired callbacks and write your class for you. This worked well because providing hooks through subclassing was a natural implementation, but it was cumbersome to write lots of little subclasses that were all mainly the same, so I did away with the boilerplate. Is that what you are talking about? If not then could you explain a little more verbosely, possibly with some code examples for how one would use your interface?	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re (tilly) 4: subclass or hooks?
by tilly (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2001 at 00:02 UTC

The only thing I have done which kind of fits your description is that I have written code with hooks that are available by subclassing, and then I exported a utility function which could be used to take a few desired callbacks and write your class for you. This worked well because providing hooks through subclassing was a natural implementation, but it was cumbersome to write lots of little subclasses that were all mainly the same, so I did away with the boilerplate.

Is that what you are talking about? If not then could you explain a little more verbosely, possibly with some code examples for how one would use your interface?

[reply]