Closures are like objects, but with only one method. Here is a way that sort of gets around that limitation. This example is pretty bland, but you get the idea (exchange keys for methods).
If you prefer $object->{method}() syntax, you can use a hash reference instead of hash.
my $object = {};
%$object = constructor();
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
my %object = constructor();
$object{save}->('name' => 'smith');
print $object{count}->(), $/;
my $name = $object{lookup}->('name');
$object{delete}->('name');
print $object{count}->(), $/;
print "My name is $name\n";
sub constructor {
my %object;
return
'save' => sub {
my ($key, $val) = @_;
die "save method requires two parameters" if ! defined $va
+l;
$object{$key} = $val;
return;
},
'delete' => sub {
my $key = shift;
return delete $object{$key};
},
'lookup' => sub {
my $key = shift;
return $object{$key};
},
'count' => sub {
return scalar keys %object;
}
}
bart,
Sort of, but I can say in all honesty that I didn't even get the idea, let alone any code, from those slides.
As best as I can decipher the slides:
An anonymous hash is set up with a couple special keys
These keys are code refs that alter the hash itself
I think you would need a "method" key as an accessor/mutator for each "regular" key. If not, you could wipe out your own methods
You mentioned in the CBhere that you thought this might be a memory leak (circular references) - I think the possibility exists
My approach doesn't have the drawbacks of the last two points. Additionally, you can add additional lexicals in my technique as a way to add "pieces" to the pseudo object, so you are not limited to a single hash.