Ok, that makes sense, but that isn't what Im talking about. My constructors are always
sub new {
my $class = shift;
my $obj = {};
# possible other initialization here
# testing for args, making sure defaults are sane etc..
bless($obj, $class);
# possible havy duty init stuff here
# init new objects inside this one, make expensive
# connections now, if its Ok to do that.
$obj;
} # END sub new
In regards to the function/method conundrum.I only write methods. first line is always
my $self = shift; or my($self,@other_stuff) = @_;
I tend to have each method self sustaining and not necessarily reliant on other methods, I.e if inserting data, make sure its going to be clean when I pull it out, if some resource should exist (an open socket for instance) and it doesn't, either bomb out or possibly initalize it now. This way, if I have solved a problem once, then I can pick up a few methods from module_a, and drop into module_b with relative ease. I can see where you are going with the thread though, and I simply didn't realize the horrific road that could come from a simple @EXPORT_OK = qw(new); To me it means, the only thing you can get at is new, and I expected the coder to write $obj = l2kashe->new(@args); (yes I understand that expectations are not always what happens) I try to always provide at least rudimentary documentation, and always note the appropriate way to use the module is
use L2kashe;
my $l2 = L2kashe->new();
Thanks for taking the time to clarify, and my apologies to the other monks for not understanding the depth of the issue. I'll just drop use Exporter and those variables from my code until truly needed. Again, thanks
On a side note, it might do to put a note in the tutorial about stub module generation via h2xs -A -X -n some::module, as that is where I saw use Exporter, assumed it was good practice to use (yes I realize how bad that is now in hindsight), and defined what I thought was a sane value.
A humbler monk
use perl;
