Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Clear questions and runnable code
get the best and fastest answer

Re: Re: Building an anonymous subroutine

by Anonymous Monk
on Aug 13, 2002 at 12:39 UTC ( #189759=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Building an anonymous subroutine
in thread Building an anonymous subroutine

Closures upon closures is not intrinsically easier or harder to keep organized than subclasses upon subclasses.

They just organize naturally in different ways. If a clean OO model fits your problem, then OO naturally channels you. If it doesn't, then using closures is better than trying to fight OO into an imitation of what you would do more naturally with closures. Particularly so in Perl where writing any OO involves so much infrastructure.

BTW your extra method-call hooks could be replaced with a single method that is intended to be called from subclasses with SUPER. Less code and infrastructure, same result.

  • Comment on Re: Re: Building an anonymous subroutine

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://189759]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others taking refuge in the Monastery: (4)
As of 2016-10-24 01:00 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How many different varieties (color, size, etc) of socks do you have in your sock drawer?

    Results (302 votes). Check out past polls.