in reply to Re: (tye)Re: ref, no, maybe?
in thread ref, no, maybe?
Yes, you shouldn't go messing with the hash behind my blessed ref when I give it to you as an object. But that isn't what I'm talking about.
You have some function that does something useful with a hash. I have an object that consists of a blessed reference to a hash. Inside the code for that class, I have to mess with my own hash. Well, if this manipulation of my own hash would be made easier by using your useful function, then why shouldn't I be allowed to do that?
Now, it'd be nice, being inside the class code, if I could get a non-blessed reference to my hash. But I can't. If that one thing were different, then I wouldn't mind the use of "HASH" eq ref($r) nearly so much.
- tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: (tye)Re4: ref, no, maybe?
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Jan 11, 2001 at 07:07 UTC | |
by tye (Sage) on Jan 11, 2001 at 08:00 UTC | |
Re: (tye)Re4: ref, no, maybe?
by jlp (Friar) on Jan 11, 2001 at 07:01 UTC | |
by tye (Sage) on Jan 11, 2001 at 10:30 UTC |