Nowhere in any of the examples or tutorials does it show the possibility of passing userid and password to either LWP->new or LWP::UserAgent->new. The former seems to accept no parameters, and the latter is defined as taking these options:

KEY                     DEFAULT
   -----------             --------------------
   agent                   "libwww-perl/#.##"
   from                    undef
   conn_cache              undef
   cookie_jar              undef
   default_headers         HTTP::Headers->new
   max_size                undef
   max_redirect            7
   parse_head              1
   protocols_allowed       undef
   protocols_forbidden     undef
   requests_redirectable   ['GET', 'HEAD']
   timeout                 180
[download]

So, you've overridden & extended new() in order to pass two parameters: userid & password.

And overridden get_basic_credentials() in order to associate those with a third parameter: realm, and maybe a fourth: url (which you pass in to get(), in order to do digest authentication.

Ain't OOP just a wonderful!

You know, it ain't like LWP was designed and implemented by some rank newbie.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

"Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."

Comment on Re^8: LWP and Digest Authentication Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: LWP and Digest Authentication by ikegami (Patriarch) on Feb 11, 2009 at 14:45 UTC
Nowhere in any of the examples or tutorials does it show the possibility of passing userid and password to either LWP->new or LWP::UserAgent->new. Of course not. `LWP->new` doesn't exists and `LWP::UserAgent->new` does not have such a parameter. Why would the docs for one class document the parameters a method in another class could have? You know, it ain't like LWP was designed and implemented by some rank newbie. What I did is no different than how WWW::Mechanize adds a `stack_depth` argument to the constructor and overrides method `content`, among others. Feature addition through extension is a common practice, but not one I like. What if you had to extend two features? Update: Added "no different" paragraph.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^10: LWP and Digest Authentication by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Feb 11, 2009 at 19:29 UTC
You don't find that having to Add a sub class to a class; Overide the constructor and add two instance variables; so that you can: Override a method and supply those two strings to the base class; An obscure and convoluted way of achieving the goal of passing a couple of parameters? Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. "Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."	[reply]
Re^11: LWP and Digest Authentication by ikegami (Patriarch) on Feb 11, 2009 at 19:52 UTC
The goal isn't to pass a couple of parameters. If you view it as parameters, there are 5 (user and password for realm on port of host). But more accurately, you want to override the auth mechanism in order to provide your own rules. A pluggable auth system or maybe just a callback would make more sense, but the work required would be similar.	[reply]