Re^4: Auto-generated constructors not finding correct SUPER?

I am confused by your answer, when I try this:

{       
    eval "package $pkg;"; 
    no strict 'refs';
    *{$pkg . '::new'} = sub {        
        (shift)->SUPER::new(%{$fields}) 
    };
}
[download]

I get the same error as before. And when I try this:

{
    no strict 'refs';
    *{$pkg . '::new'} = sub { 
        eval "package $pkg;";        
        (shift)->SUPER::new(%{$fields}) 
    };
}
[download]

I get the same error as well. It would seem to me that SUPER is determined at compile time, is that true?

Does the whole subroutine need to be eval-ed?

-stvn

Comment on Re^4: Auto-generated constructors not finding correct SUPER? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
•Re^5: Auto-generated constructors not finding correct SUPER? by merlyn (Sage) on Jan 10, 2005 at 17:39 UTC
Does the whole subroutine need to be eval-ed? Since "package" has lexical boundaries, yes. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.	[reply]
Re^6: Auto-generated constructors not finding correct SUPER? by stvn (Monsignor) on Jan 10, 2005 at 18:37 UTC
merlyn, Thanks for the quick response. I tried this: `eval "package $pkg; sub new { (shift)->SUPER::new( \%\$fields ); }"` [download] and got this: `Variable "$fields" will not stay shared at (eval 32) line 1.` [download] Although the the 300+ tests passed, and if `$fields` was somehow lost, they would not have passed. Is this warning something I should worry about? Any idea as to what context `$fields` is not staying shared within? -stvn	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^6: Auto-generated constructors not finding correct SUPER? by stvn (Monsignor) on Jan 10, 2005 at 20:52 UTC
dragonchild figured it out, this code works. `eval "package $pkg; *new = sub { (shift)->SUPER::new( \%\$fields ); }"` [download] It avoids the warnings, and all the tests pass. Thanks for the help. -stvn	[reply] [d/l]