Re^6: Modification of @ISA at run time

TY again for the clarification. I understand what you mean. OTOH your own article at Re: Modification of @ISA at run time stresses the advantages of the delegator model over the class factory one when one has to deal with many methods needing different "versions" each depending on some conditions. So the question is: what if one has both requirements? I.e. the latter one on a set of "common" methods (exposing a uniform interface) and the need for type-specific features as well?

Comment on Re^6: Modification of @ISA at run time

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Modification of @ISA at run time by nothingmuch (Priest) on Sep 03, 2005 at 13:12 UTC
I have not yet met such a case... I think the two are fundamentally contradicting - one is trying to blur the difference, and the other is trying to make it obvious. The issue is that object which have type specific features are not really polymoprhic WRT to each other, but only WRT to their superclass. Any code that deals with such a case should probably either try to deal with smaller chunks of functionality, talk to the delegates directly, or make the program work a bit harder by making a better factory. -nuffin zz zZ Z Z #!perl	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^7: Modification of @ISA at run time
by nothingmuch (Priest) on Sep 03, 2005 at 13:12 UTC

I think the two are fundamentally contradicting - one is trying to blur the difference, and the other is trying to make it obvious. The issue is that object which have type specific features are not really polymoprhic WRT to each other, but only WRT to their superclass.

Any code that deals with such a case should probably either try to deal with smaller chunks of functionality, talk to the delegates directly, or make the program work a bit harder by making a better factory.

-nuffin
zz zZ Z Z #!perl

[reply]