RE: Re (tilly) 1: oo perl - using the super-class

hm, no, that's exactly what i don't want. i never want to have the main code say:

$trans = new TransactionA
[download]

i want to say

$trans = new Transaction($request);
[download]

and have $trans be an instance of TransactionA or TransactionB. i'm not up on oo terminology, but i think what i really want is a TransactionFactory class. again, i'm not sure but the above describes what i'm looking for. i'm just wondering if it's a good thing to look for or is there a better design to use?

Comment on RE: Re (tilly) 1: oo perl - using the super-class Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: Re (tilly) 1: oo perl - using the super-class by merlyn (Sage) on Oct 03, 2000 at 18:52 UTC
Your original code was fine. Just make sure that neither of your two specific types of transaction inherit from the generic transaction, or you're toast on the `new` routine! -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker	[reply]
RE (tilly) 3: oo perl - using the super-class by tilly (Archbishop) on Oct 03, 2000 at 18:53 UTC
Well you can do whatever you want with the two argument form of bless, but you will break inheritance. OTOH containment (ie making one property of an object be a member of a different class) is usually cleaner than inheritance anyways, but if you play this kind of game you really should document it to avoid potential grief for someone else.	[reply]