Notwithstanding the fact that he doesn't appear to need to export anything -- as pointed out by other posts -- I'm not so sure it's advisable to suggest using @EXPORT very often. I realize a lot of well known and good modules do this, but most of the time, I think it makes more sense to use @EXPORT_OK and let the caller specify what they want to import. | [reply]
[d/l]
[select] |
Agreed, but aside from the object/non-object mixup which I didn't catch, I interpreted the original poster's comments as indicating that he expected use mymodule; would make the entries in @EXPORT_OK available without explicit package referencing. My misunderstanding, I guess...
chas
| [reply]
[d/l] |
I believe you should "use Exporter" not "require Exporter"
I believe you should "require Exporter" or "use base 'Exporter'" not "use Exporter".
The exporter module defines &Exporter::import so that it can be inheritied by other modules. Calling Exporter::import('Exporter') doesn't really make sense.
| [reply] |
Doing a "use Exporter;" will not do anything different than a "require Exporter;" because the import() function in Exporter doesn't do anything because Exporter doesn't define @EXPORT or @EXPORT_OK.
The only difference between "use base Exporter;" and either "use Exporter;" or "require Exporter;" is that "use base" will modify @ISA for you and the others make you modify it yourself. You either have to have Exporter in your @ISA or have done something like *import = \&Exporter::import; to get the benefits of Exporter.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing.
Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid.
Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence.
Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
Well, I just checked in the Camel books. The 3rd edition does indicate "require Exporter;" in modules, but the 2nd edition (which I learned from) has "use Exporter;" in modules in most of the examples (although there was a "require Exporter;" in an example.) Randal Schwartz's book "Learning Perl Objects, References & Modules" says "...As a module author, all you do is add:
use Exporter;
our @ISA = qw(Exporter);
I just made a module skeleton using h2xs, and "require Exporter;" appears in the module file. So maybe either will suffice..I'll go with the "require" form since that's what h2xs produced.
chas
(Update: Hadn't seen Dragonchild's reply yet - that seems to settle the difference. Fixed typo.) | [reply]
[d/l] |
