How often do you see this in code?
sub new { my $class = shift; return bless [] => $class; }
Not very often. However, I'll bet you often see errors like this:
my $cust = Customer->new($id); # violates encapsulation print $cust->{name}; # violates encapsulation again! (unless internal): if ( $cust->_preferred ) { ... } # bad interface if the following fails: $cust->set_name($cust->name); # Hello Demeter! (Yeah, this is contrived) my $office = $cust->salesman->manager->office;
What I would like to see is a book which focuses on OO programming for Perl, but with two primary considerations. The first is to focus primarily on what people are likely to encounter in the wild: blessed hashrefs. The second consideration is teaching them how to think about OO programming.
Intermediate Perl and Object Oriented Perl both have great things to say on these topics, but neither is quite what I would like to see out there. Unfortunately, many Perl programmers learn the syntax of OO in Perl but they don't learn OO. Blessing a hashref isn't enough. Instead, I'd love to see more Perl programmers who can reasonably discuss:
This wouldn't be a design pattern book. This would not be a syntax book. It would be something which would open up the eyes of Perl programmers regarding OO, but it would be straight-forward. Want class data? Use Class::Data::Inheritable and explain the concept. Need delegation? Use Class::Delegator and explain the concept. It's not to claim the the tools the book uses are best practices. It's to claim that the ideas the book uses are best practices. That's why it would mention blessed array references, but all examples would be blessed hash references. That's what you're likely to see and it's more important to focus on the concepts than the implementations.
So, um, somebody go out and write the damned thing.
It's important for academics who are more concerned with being correct than useful.
Override nothing! Delegate everything!
Ok, maybe I'm a wee bit bitter after losing a debate about Pathnames, Strings and subclassing.
Re:Liskov can bite me
Ovid on 2007-09-20T05:51:32
I think you must be thinking about something else. Liskov doesn't say anything about not being able to override anything. It merely states that a subclass must be substitutable for the parent class without affecting the correctness of a program. You can override all you want, just make sure that the interface doesn't change.
What's wrong with this?# Hello Demeter! (Yeah, this is contrived)
my $office = $cust->salesman->manager->office;
Re:I don't get it
Ovid on 2007-09-27T10:37:09
my $office = $cust->salesman->manager->office;It's a question of encapsulation. Imagine that the Salesman class no longer has need of a manager accessor, but you still need to know which office the salesman is with. You might get a office method pushed into the Salesman class. Then, every place where you have the above code needs to be changed to:
my $office = $cust->salesman->office;If that's called a lot, it can be a maintenance nightmare.
However, what if you have this?
sub Customer::office { shift->salesman->manager->office }Then, your calling code (again, remember this example is contrived), becomes this:
my $office = $cust->office;At this point, if you need to change the hierarchy, you only have to alter &Customer::office instead of all of the calling code. You've properly encapsulated the hierarchical structure and greatly improved maintainability.
Re:I don't get it
hex on 2007-09-27T14:52:48
You've properly encapsulated the hierarchical structure and greatly improved maintainability.
Oh, I see what you mean now. Right, thanks.Re:I don't get it
Ovid on 2007-09-27T14:59:34
You're welcome. It's not exactly intuitive. Took me a couple of tries to get it
:) Re:I don't get it
perigrin on 2007-10-01T05:22:13
Thank you. I hadn’t realized Moose’s powerful delegation mechanisms we’re more than handy shortcuts. This provides an excellent use case for them.
For those who don’t know Moose every attribute object can have a handles er … attribute … so the example here can be defined like:
package Salesman;
use Moose;
has manager => (
...
handles => [qw( office )],
);
package Cusotomer;
use Moose;
has salesman => (
isa => 'Salesman',
...
handles => [qw( office )],
)Moose will setup
Salesman::office
which delegates to$self->manager->office
andCustomer::office
which will delegate to$self->salesman->office
providing exactly the kind of encapsulation wanted here.Re:I don't get it
avik on 2008-03-05T22:24:14
Thanks for very thoughtful approach to teaching OO. Unfortunately, in my college days we learned OO in a worsed possible way (questionable faculty, clueless students, books never used).