Re^7: Where is the @ISA array?

That's a petty and trivial reason to not use base, no?

Considering there's no reason to use base in the first place...

Why has there not been a "bug" fix?

They did fix it with the creation of parent. Fixing it in place would break the following intended use of base:

{
   package Base;
   ...   
}

{
   package Subclass;
   use base 'Base';
   ...
}
[download]

Comment on Re^7: Where is the @ISA array? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Where is the @ISA array? by Anonymous Monk on Jan 22, 2009 at 14:21 UTC
So the fix is to go back to all of our code and replace base with parent and retest and try to explain to our clients why they have to pay for it. That's just great. No, really. Thanks a lot. I guess the answer is use Moose! I'm never using base again. Nor parent.	[reply]
Re^9: Where is the @ISA array? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jan 22, 2009 at 14:26 UTC
Heh, you're fretting over converting to parent, but changing to Mouse is ok. Who said anything about changing any old code? And if you had to, how is that a "fixing base" vs "creating parent" thing? You'd have to change the code either way.	[reply]
Re^10: Where is the @ISA array? by Anonymous Monk on Jan 22, 2009 at 14:30 UTC
Well if the answer is that you shouldn't use that module anymore -- what guarantee do we have that you guys won't discover a bug in parent, and release the bug fix as guardian or such? Ruby and Smalltalk are really starting to look more and more attractive ...	[reply]
Re^11: Where is the @ISA array? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jan 22, 2009 at 15:40 UTC
Re^12: Where is the @ISA array? by Anonymous Monk on Jan 22, 2009 at 15:47 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^11: Where is the @ISA array? by Corion (Patriarch) on Jan 22, 2009 at 14:59 UTC
Re^12: Where is the @ISA array? by Anonymous Monk on Jan 22, 2009 at 15:34 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here