Re: Reblessing (was: OO Perl: calling a constructor within a class)


laziness, impatience, and hubris
	PerlMonks

Re: Reblessing (was: OO Perl: calling a constructor within a class)

by dragonchild (Archbishop)

on Sep 27, 2001 at 17:39 UTC ( [id://115088]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Reblessing (was: OO Perl: calling a constructor within a class)
in thread OO Perl: calling a constructor within a class

*shudders at the thoughts of his objects doing the can('can')*

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

Don't go borrowing trouble. For programmers, this means Worry only about what you need to implement.

Comment on Re: Reblessing (was: OO Perl: calling a constructor within a class)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re (tilly) 2: Reblessing (was: OO Perl: calling a constructor within a class)
by tilly (Archbishop) on Sep 27, 2001 at 21:05 UTC

Objects can always can, but a special can can can the usual can. But to see it's a special can you can:
$check_that_can_with = UNIVERSAL::can($obj,'can') ne \&UNIVERSAL::can;
[download]
But you can't catch the man who replaced the default can:
my $can = \&UNIVERSAL::can;
local $^W = 0;
*UNIVERSAL::can = sub {
  $_[1] eq 'can' ? \&UNIVERSAL::can : &$can;
};
[download]
So can that man before he cans your can!

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom