Re: Re: (my?) problem with re-blessed references(?)

[chromatic]

in reply to Re: (my?) problem with re-blessed references(?)
in thread (my?) problem with re-blessed references(?)

He's using the Flyweight pattern. Check the hash keys carefully.

[jreades]

I think that BrowserUK's version isn't using the memory address as the hash key (which is what Abigail-II does). So rather than each object looking up parameters in the superclass like so:

$phrase{'Quote=HASH(0x804b514)'}

It's just calling the same key each time.

This is why Abigail's objects need to clean up after themselves much more actively.

[djantzen]

If he's using Flyweight intentionally, then the overwriting of instance data is to be expected. This is not what he wants however. The point of the Flyweight is to enable the quick flow of data through a standard framework. But he appears simply to want standard inheritance, for which package lexicals will not do for more than one instance.

Update: D'oh! so sub phrase : lvalue { $phrase{shift}; } means that the shifted value is the memory address of the thingy and since it's an lvalue that is assigned the unique instance data. Ergo, my $opinion = ('cool!' && 'eewww!').

[BrowserUk]

See Adrianh's post below for the ({sheepish grin}stupid) reason the data was being overwritten. The inheritance is now working correctly.

---

Examine what is said, not who speaks.