Re: Suppressing Subroutine redefined warning

How are they defining the same subroutines? Are they defining subs in the same namespace, e.g. main? If so, that's probably not a good idea. If possible, you should have each package define the subs in its own namespace, and then use a classname to access the subs in one namespace or the other. Like so:

# Backend::A
package Backend::A;
sub foo { }
1;
[download]

# Backend::B
package Backend::B;
sub foo { }
1;
[download]

# main
my $backend = 'Backend::A';
require $backend;
$backend->foo();

# then later, if necessary:
$backend = 'Backend::B';
require $backend;
$backend->foo();
[download]

We're building the house of the future together.

Comment on Re: Suppressing Subroutine redefined warning Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Suppressing Subroutine redefined warning by philcrow (Priest) on Mar 27, 2006 at 20:22 UTC
They are mixins which define subs in the same packages, but not main. I agree that that would be a bad idea. It's possible I could be talked out of my mixin scheme, but it would take you a lot of effort. Explaining why would also be a lot of effort, which I will avoid, at least for now. Phil	[reply]
Re^3: Suppressing Subroutine redefined warning by japhy (Canon) on Mar 27, 2006 at 20:35 UTC
The warnings pragma is lexical. If you don't want the 'redefine' warnings, you have to say so in the mixin classes themselves. Jeff `japhy` Pinyan, P.L., P.M., P.O.D, X.S.: Perl, regex, and `perl` hacker How can we ever be the sold short or the cheated, we who for every service have long ago been overpaid? ~~ Meister Eckhart	[reply]
Re^4: Suppressing Subroutine redefined warning by philcrow (Priest) on Mar 27, 2006 at 21:07 UTC
Thanks, that is correct. But, I don't want to remove the warnings in all cases. So, I'll do a bit of redesign to mind my namespace manners a bit better. Phil	[reply]