Yeah its right.. but why? when? where? If you shrug don't use it. How many modules will break for no apparent reason due to that one singular line?
I don't think that would be right anywhere, and certainly not in a consturctor. Perhaps you meant the opposite?
my $class=ref($proto) || $proto;
which AFAICT, wouldnt break any code at all. Why would it? The primary objection to this idiom (assuming you mean when it is used in a new()) is one of semantic meaning. Class->new() has a clear meaning, but $obj->new() doesn't really. Does it mean to copy the object? Does it mean to create a new object of the same type as the old? Does it mean something deeper?
This is primarily an issue that detailed documentation resolves nicely. I would say that you could replace my $class=shift with my $proto=shift; my $class=ref($proto) or $proto; just about everywhere without a failure.
One trap with using this idom (and about the only real trap regarding that I am aware of) is when someone accidentally mixes indirect notation with direct notation, or calls new in a strange way
my $Obj=new Class->new(@args); my $New=Class->new(@argS)->new()->foo(); # probably an error
most likely will create an initialized object, then use that to create an unitialized object. A hard to track down error that is thankfully rather uncommon as well.
In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Philosophical Perly Queues
by demerphq
in thread Philosophical Perly Queues
by mojotoad
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |