It's a completely tangential argument, because I think people argue about the wrong things. :)
When people start talking about what Perl should do (or shouldn't do), they forget to think about what they have to give up. Seemingly simple changes have long-reaching consequences, and there are trade-offs. You never just fix one thing. You fix it and break other things. In this case, when you fix the encapsulation issue, you break my whipupitude.
In Perl I don't have to think about your paradigm shift because I don't have to choose. I don't even have to shift. I use what's expedient. That I can mix these in Perl is quite powerful. It works because there already is a common practive to write things both ways. That's always going to work in Perl because an object is just a blessed reference, and most objects I run into are going to be anonymous hashes, despite all the odd things that people could do with their classes.
In reply to Re^3: OO in Perl 5: still inadequate
by brian_d_foy
in thread OO in Perl 5: still inadequate
by Aristotle
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |