Re^5: Inheritance and calling a subclass method *from* a baseclass method... (rephrase)

I wasn't particularly confused on that point and another choice of example name wouldn't have eliminated my question: Why would you choose to write:

sub whatever {
    #...
    my ($method) = ( caller(0) )[3];
    #...
}
[download]

when it appears to be functionally equivalent to the trival and thus clearer:

sub whatever {
    #...
    my $method= "whatever";
    #...
}
[download]

Comment on Re^5: Inheritance and calling a subclass method from a baseclass method... (rephrase) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Inheritance and calling a subclass method from a baseclass method... (rephrase) by izut (Chaplain) on Mar 04, 2007 at 21:27 UTC
You are totally right. I thought that `caller` use the package name that inherits the owner of abstract method, but it doesn't. Sorry about the confusion :-) Igor 'izut' Sutton your code, your rules.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^7: Inheritance and calling a subclass method from a baseclass method... (rephrase) by tye (Sage) on Mar 04, 2007 at 21:49 UTC
Thanks. That made me realize my mistake. I was overlooking that caller would return `__PACKAGE__."::methodName"` not just `"methodName"`. Yes, it'd be nice if caller offered information about under what name the function was called instead of just under what name the function was compiled. It'd be nice if the following code: `package Source; sub orig { # use caller() here } package Importer; @ISA= "Parent"; *dest= \&Source::orig; package main; Parent->dest();` [download] Would be able to determine that the caller was trying to find "Parent::dest", found "Importer::dest" via inheritance, and that function which was compiled under the name "Source::orig", rather than only being able to find out that last item. - tye	[reply] [d/l] [select]