comment on

I dislike the idiom because it promotes ambiguous code. The author of $obj->new(); hides something that the author of (ref $obj)->new(); tells you.

Often it makes no real difference and the noise is about who is being forced to write code to accomodate someone else. I try to be more cooperative.

Usually I would write your new more like this.

sub new {
    my $class = shift( @_);
    croak "Bad class parameter" 
        if not defined $class or ref $class;
    bless [@_], $class;
}
[download]

Which gives a message like:

Bad class parameter at file.pl line 100

What is it that you find fine about the idiom?

In reply to (Re)+: A few Perl OOP questions. (disparaging) by rir
in thread A few Perl OOP questions. by Anonymous Monk

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Do you know where your variables are?
	PerlMonks