I was writing this code while you were posting...

use strict;
use warnings;

package Foo;
use parent 'Foo_Bar';
sub new {
    my $class = shift;
    return bless {}, $class;
}
sub aa {
  my ( $self, $args ) = @_;
  my $val = $self->_aa ( $args->{'bar'} );
  print "aa\n";
}

package main;
my $foo = Foo->new();
$foo->aa( { arg1 => 'some' } );
[download]

and in Foo_Bar.pm (underscore instead of :: only for my convenience):

use strict;
use warnings;

package Foo_Bar;
sub _aa {
  my( $self, $quux ) = @_;
  print "\t_aa\n";
}
1;
[download]

... provided all his calls are already ->method calls and all objects/$self are always blessed into Foo and never into Foo::Bar and his not trying to use SUPER ...

In short as long as this approach doesn't lead to multiple inheritance of third party classes.

So probably importing is safer.

So probably importing is safer.

It certainly is the more transparent solution, at least. But the methods that must be moved are used in a limited scope (they are private), so checking for correct calls might not be too cumbersome.

As always, TIMTOWTDI :)

This is probably where all the C++ books explain the difference between "is a" and "uses"...

since I'm not a C++ programmer you might need to explain further.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}