Yes, you're correct. I used a rotten example. Here's a clearer example. A corporate customer is assigned to a company, which has an office which has a manager.
my $manager = $customer->company->office->manager;Later on, we realize that this is a bad class heirarchy and the customer should belong to an office and the company is superflous to this, but we've hardcoded a chain of method calls and this makes life difficult. What if we had done this:
sub Customer::manager { my $self = shift; return $self->{delegates}{company}->manager; } sub Company::manager { my $self = shift; return $self->{delegates}{office}->manager; } sub Office::manager { my $self = shift; return $self->{delegates}{manager}; }
Now the fix is easy, when we want to drop the Company class reference in the Customer object.
sub Customer::manager { my $self = shift; # return $self->{delegates}{company}->manager return $self->{delegates}{office}->manager; }
Cheers,
Ovid
New address of my CGI Course.
In reply to Re: Re: Often Overlooked OO Programming Guidelines
by Ovid
in thread Often Overlooked OO Programming Guidelines
by Ovid
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |