in reply to Re^4: Is it ok to mix functional and oo programming in one package?
in thread Is it ok to mix functional and oo programming in one package?

Is there some way to do this:

#!/usr/bin/perl
use warnings;
use strict;
use Foo; # some "forward declaration" syntax instead of looking for Fo
+o.pm?

sub new {
    print "haha";
    return;
}

my $a = new Foo;

$a->hello;

package Foo;
sub new {
    return bless {},shift;
}

sub hello {
    print "hello";
}

[download]

I couldn't find it under use in perlfunc. I was also trying use main::Foo; and use ::Foo; based on some ideas that popped into my head while reading about Packages in perlmod.

I humbly seek wisdom.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Is it ok to mix functional and oo programming in one package?
by Joost (Canon) on Oct 19, 2007 at 21:00 UTC
    Anything that unambiguously uses a package automatically declares a package, and so does a package Foo statement.

    So you could do 

    package Foo;
package main; # or whatever package is the 'current' one

    [download]
    Which is probably the clearest way of doing it, or you can do something like: 
    $Foo::a=$Foo::a;  # using $Foo::a twice will silence the 'used only on
+ce' warning

    [download]
    Note that fully specified package variables are exempt from 'strict "vars"' rules. Or you can declare a subroutine: 
    sub Foo::declare_package_Foo;

    [download]
    The same technique would work for anything else that unambiguously uses the Foo package.

    "What should it profit a man, if he should win a flame war, yet lose his cool?"
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom