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

Re^7: Beyond Inside-Out

by xdg (Monsignor)
on May 30, 2007 at 14:46 UTC ( [id://618196]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^6: Beyond Inside-Out
in thread Beyond Inside-Out

By name and purpose, a "plug-in" can't make assumptions about the makeup of the objects it will work with.

See, for example, CGI::Application and how its plugins work. It's just Exporter bringing in things as requested.

There's no reason that plugins couldn't be written to work with Alter in some way, but many existing plugins violate the assumption you stated.

-xdg

Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Beyond Inside-Out
by clinton (Priest) on May 30, 2007 at 15:17 UTC
    I think I must be missing something. I can't see what the problem is.

    Surely, the only thing that matters is that the property that method X deals with, is protected against being overwritten by any other method? As long as all other methods that want to access that property do so through the defined interface, rather than trying to access it directly, it shouldn't be a problem.

    Am I missing something?

    thanks

    clint

      The defined interface decides which property to access based on the caller() function. Importing a method into a namespace (e.g. via Exporter) only creates an alias to the original, so any functions called from the method see the original namespace as the result of caller().

      Example: $obj is of class MyClass. Depending on whether ego() is called from a native subroutine of MyClass (bar)or an imported subroutine from Plugin (foo), ego() finds a different calling package -- and thus returns a different storage hash. In the example below, foo() and bar both serve as accessors to the name field -- but they store/access different underlying hashes for the same object.

      use strict; use warnings; no warnings qw/once/; package Alter; my %data; sub ego { return( $data{scalar caller(0)} ||= {} ); } package Plugin; sub foo { $_[0]->ego()->{name} = $_[1] if @_ > 1; return $_[0]->ego()->{name}; } package MyClass; *ego = \&Alter::ego; *foo = \&Plugin::foo; sub bar { $_[0]->ego()->{name} = $_[1] if @_ > 1; return $_[0]->ego()->{name}; } package main; my $obj = bless( \my $scalar, "MyClass" ); $obj->bar( "Larry" ); $obj->foo( "Damian" ); for my $m ( qw/bar foo/ ) { print "$m: ", $obj->$m, "\n"; }

      Prints:

      bar: Larry foo: Damian

      This would be reasonable behavior if MyClass was a subclass of Plugin and both classes defined a name field, but that isn't what's happening here.

      -xdg

      Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.

        But that's my point - by asking for foo() or bar() you're not asking for the same thing - the fact that they both use the key name to store their values internally is irrelevant.

        foo is trying to violate bar's encapsulation by accessing the value directly. Instead it should be using the provided API.

        clint

Re^8: Beyond Inside-Out
by Anno (Deacon) on May 30, 2007 at 18:12 UTC
    See, for example, CGI::Application and how its plugins work

    I will, thanks. It's on Alter's to-do list.

    Anno

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://618196]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (6)
As of 2024-04-23 19:34 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found