Re^4: Is "ref($class) || $class" a bad thing?

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned called_as_method from Devel::Caller.

use Devel::Caller qw( called_as_method );

sub new {
    croak "must call new as method" unless called_as_method(0);
    ...
};
[download]

Comment on Re^4: Is "ref($class) \|\| $class" a bad thing? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
•Re^5: Is "ref($class) \|\| $class" a bad thing? by merlyn (Sage) on Jul 20, 2004 at 13:32 UTC
I'd consider that "a bit too much navel inspection". It breaks code I write that looks like this: `my $destiny = $someobject->can("somemethod"); @_ = ($someobject, @args); goto &$destiny;` [download] There shouldn't be any way that this target method should be able to tell that I got there with `->can` instead of a true method lookup. So if you write code that breaks that, shame on you. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^6: Is "ref($class) \|\| $class" a bad thing? by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jul 20, 2004 at 16:46 UTC
I'd consider that "a bit too much navel inspection" Oh I agree completely (I said I was surprised that nobody had mentioned it - not that it was a good idea :-) It breaks code I write that looks like this: ++ Good point.	[reply]


There's more than one way to do things
	PerlMonks