Re: Re: •Re: Re: Perl - Is it an OO Language

You keep using the phrase "weak at best". I do not think it means what you think it means.

Feel free to explain how an enclosed lexical is "weakly" encapsulated. It may not be the most popular way of creating an object property, but it is a deliberate language feature.

Comment on Re: Re: •Re: Re: Perl - Is it an OO Language

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: •Re: Re: Perl - Is it an OO Language by Anonymous Monk on Aug 26, 2002 at 21:56 UTC
We have mixed meanings happening. My statement was not in reference to how strong an encapsulation we can achieve using various techniques (flyweight, closure, etc), but that Perl's support is weak (if you want it, you'll need to do it yourself and subclassers will need to know your internal implementation details in order to cooperate).	[reply]


more useful options
	PerlMonks

Re: Re: &bull;Re: Re: Perl - Is it an OO Language

Re: Re: •Re: Re: Perl - Is it an OO Language