Re: Ring Memory

This might be more useful as a tied-array implementation, which would allow people to use it directly as an array. Have a look at perltie.

--rjray

Comment on Re: Ring Memory

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Ring Memory by fergal (Chaplain) on Jul 31, 2004 at 01:57 UTC
I hate ties but they are a necessary evil in a language where the basic data types aren't objects. So a tied version is a good idea but please preserve the OO interface too, there's no reason not to have both.	[reply]
Re^3: Ring Memory by Velaki (Chaplain) on Jul 31, 2004 at 13:04 UTC
Yeah, I originally started to write it as a tie, but wound up making it OO because I was going to make it N-dimensional, plus many of my users don't like/are confused by ties, but objects they love. In the end, the module stayed an array, so I'll add the tie interface for the 2.0 version, but I'll leave the OO portion, simply because the tie will be a wrapper around it. This way I can have access to the component functions from an inspection standpoint, if necessary. Thanks for the comments! "Perl. There is no substitute."	[reply]