Hi Ron,
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
Ron Weidner <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have a class named Widget in a file named Widget.pm. I have another class
> named Table in a file called Table.pm. Table extends Widget.
>
> ---
>
> package Widget;
> #file Widget.pm
>
> #insert a bunch of methods...
>
> ---
>
> package Table;
> #file Table.pm
> use Widget;
> @ISA=("Widget");
>
Here you can use http://search.cpan.org/dist/parent/ or maybe
http://search.cpan.org/dist/base/ . (or just use Moose or friends).
> #insert several methods here...
>
> 1;
>
> ---
>
> package Framework;
> #file Framework.pm
> use Widget;
> use Table;
> 1;
>
> ---
>
> What I was doing was adding "use Widget;" and "use Table;" to the top of the
> program that uses these classes. But, because I expect this library of
> classes to grow significantly I created a third .pm file called Framework.
> Inside the Framework.pm I added the "use Widget;" and "use Table;" and now I
> only "use Framework;" in my application.
>
Well, in your case, "use Framework;" will be equivalent to "use Table;" (but
won't be if more classes are added.).
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> #test.pl
> use strict;
> use warnings;
> use Framework;
>
> #This line of code seems replaceable by either
> #of the next 2 commented lines
> my $some_var_of_class_widget = new Widget();
>
> #uncommented, the next line of code seems to work too...
> #my $some_var_of_class_widget = Widget->new();
>
> #uncommented, so does the next line of code
> #my $some_var_of_class_widget = Widget->new;
>
> my $table = new Table();
>
Don't use indirect object notation:
http://www.modernperlbooks.com/mt/2009/08/the-problems-with-indirect-object-notation.html
> #insert several tests here...
>
Why aren't you using Test::More and TAP?
http://search.cpan.org/perldoc?Test::Tutorial
> This was a guess that happened to work. My queston is if this is a common
> solution to reducing the number of "use" lines?
Well, generally what I did until now was make sure that each of my classes
explicitly spelled all of its dependencies, so I knew everything would
continue to work.
Your solution seems fine, but may break if some of the modules export symbols
(see http://search.cpan.org/dist/Sub-Exporter/ and
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Exporter/ ), and you wish to import them as well.
> Is there a better solution
> that wouldn't cause the all classes to get compiled at runtime every time I
> "use Framework;" especially since all applications that use the Framework may
> not need the entire suite of classes contained in the framework?
Well, I've also heard of Damian Conway's http://search.cpan.org/dist/Toolkit/ ,
but I was told it's buggy, and it may be too magical. I should note that you
may be prematurely optimising here, so you shouldn't worry about getting a
lot of code compiled, until you are sure it's the bottleneck:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PrematureOptimization
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/
My Public Domain Photos - http://www.flickr.com/photos/shlomif/
C++ is complex, complexifying and complexified.
(With apologies to the Oxford English Dictionary).
Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
http://learn.perl.org/
