Introducing MooseX::hasn't

NAME

MooseX::hasn't - syntactic sugar to complement "has"

SYNOPSIS

{
  package Person;
  use Moose;
  has name => (is => "ro", writer => "_rename", required => 1);
}
 
{
  package AnonymousPerson;
  use Moose;
  use MooseX::hasn't;
  extends "Person";
  hasn't name => (default => 'anon');
}
 
my $dude  = AnonymousPerson->new;
say($dude->can('_rename') ? 'true' : 'false');  # false
say($dude->name);                               # croaks
[download]

more at MooseX::hasn't

perl -E'sub Monkey::do{say$_,for@_,do{($monkey=[caller(0)]->[3])=~s{::}{ }and$monkey}}"Monkey say"->Monkey::do'

Comment on Introducing MooseX::hasn't Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by Arunbear (Prior) on Apr 02, 2012 at 17:25 UTC
The link you posted doesn't work. `extends "Person"; hasn't name => (default => 'anon');` [download] that reads like a contradiction. If it doesn't support the same operations as Person then in what sense does it extend Person? Or is this meant to be an Acme type module?	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by tobyink (Canon) on Apr 02, 2012 at 22:22 UTC
The link you posted doesn't work. Thanks, fixed. If it doesn't support the same operations as Person then in what sense does it extend Person? See "Doesn't this break polymorphism?" in the FAQ. Or is this meant to be an Acme type module? Initially, yes, hence the release date. But I can see potential uses for it. `perl -E'sub Monkey::do{say$_,for@_,do{($monkey=[caller(0)]->[3])=~s{::}{ }and$monkey}}"Monkey say"->Monkey::do'`	[reply]
Re^3: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by Arunbear (Prior) on Apr 03, 2012 at 10:23 UTC
It breaks the inheritance contract, not polymorphism per se (I think you've got the two concepts confused). Polymorphism doesn't depend on inheritance, e.g. Roles enable polymorphism without inheritance.	[reply]
Re^4: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by tobyink (Canon) on Apr 03, 2012 at 13:14 UTC
Re^5: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by Arunbear (Prior) on Apr 03, 2012 at 17:58 UTC
Re: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by Anonymous Monk on Apr 01, 2012 at 17:52 UTC
I thought I read somewhere that the ' separator has been deprecated/depreciated	[reply]
Re^2: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by tobyink (Canon) on Apr 01, 2012 at 19:02 UTC
It hasn't been deprecated yet (or at least, I don't get any warnings about it in 5.14.2, and there's no mention of its deprecation in perl5160delta), but it certainly seems a candidate for deprecation. The module doesn't rely on the apostrophe though. If you happen to find yourself on Perl 5.18 or whatever, and can't use apostrophe, then just use `hasn::t` and everything will be good. `perl -E'sub Monkey::do{say$_,for@_,do{($monkey=[caller(0)]->[3])=~s{::}{ }and$monkey}}"Monkey say"->Monkey::do'`	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Introducing MooseX::hasn't by Anonymous Monk on Apr 03, 2012 at 21:46 UTC
The module doesn't rely on the apostrophe though. Well, I think it does. `MooseX::hasn::t` is much weaker than `MooseX::hasn't` or even `MooseX::hasnot` which is what you should have named this thing if you weren't trying to be c''l Cool, I guess replacing os with 's doesn't always work	[reply] [d/l] [select]


Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
	PerlMonks