in reply to Re: Foo::Button->new vs. newButton()
in thread Foo::Button->new vs. newButton()

No, no the class names are not long at all. But thanks for the input. Well, it hides OO to some point. And I should of course put the symbol exported in EXPORT_OK.

As for the length, well... this is a static method. And no inheritance is needed beyond Foo::Button along the library. So why write Foo::Button->new and many others (for Text,Menu,FadeMenu,MovieClip,... ) where I can just get away with newFoo()
It was just a thought. :))
Thanks.
  • Comment on Re: Re: Foo::Button->new vs. newButton()

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Foo::Button->new vs. newButton()
by stvn (Monsignor) on Jan 16, 2004 at 19:58 UTC

    Just because you dont inherit it, doesn't mean someone else wont want to.

    -stvn
[reply]

      Incidentally, if you wanted to get that syntax elsewhere you could provide an autoload routine:-

      sub AUTOLOAD {
    my $f = $AUTOLOAD;
    $f=~s/.*:://;
    if ($f =~ /^new(.*)/) {
    return $1->new(@_);
    } else {
    die "Undefined subroutine: $f";
    }
}

      [download]

      I don't think it's a very good idea though, and that wouldn't give you a Foo::Button, just a button. Probably not good at all :) You can do all sorts of interesting things with AUTOLOAD

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom