use Perl

• I don't get the set_method things (Score:1)

  by Alias (5735)

  I mean, ok, I see some cases where it would be useful.
  
  But it seems to me that 90% of the time, you don't really NEED the ability to mutate the objects after creation time, especially with that sort of thing. You'd almost always set it at creation time.
  
  Mutators just adds more (potentially illogical) states (and thus potential bugs).
  
$mean = Mean->new( skipinf => 1, trim => 1 )->on( @data );

package Mean;

use Object::Tiny qw{
        skipinf
        trim
};

sub o
  • Re: (Score:1)

    by educated_foo (3106)

    My broader point was that the current fad of calling everything a "DSL"can exist only because people are thoughtless with interfaces and/or have been trained to create painful ones. I agree that setters are probably unnecessary in this case, but your cleaner code nicely demonstrates one of my own interface pet peeves: Blah->new(@stuff)->doit. There's always at least one in the CPAN queue -- see Sudo this morning. Doing this is almost always a mistake indicative of someone having been told that "obj
    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Alias (5735)

      > Sometimes a function is just a function.
      
      Sometimes, yes. And it's true people get bitten by the object fad.
      
      But as you scale is can be very advantageous to have the option of encapsulating a function and moving it around.
      
      It's not really safe to do this with a raw code-ref, because a coderef could be anything at all and is tied to the Perl instance. A data structure is far more flexible.
      
      "Process Objects" (objects that describe a computational process) allow you to do things that functions can not do.
      
      For e
      • Re: (Score:1)

        by educated_foo (3106)

        "Process Objects" (objects that describe a computational process) allow you to do things that functions can not do.

        IMHO they get the defaults wrong most of the time. If you amortize over all the people using a module, it's less trouble for those who need them to go through the full pain of either serializing functions through e.g. Storable or doing a custom solution, than for everyone to use a ghastly "OO" interface, or roll their own. Distributing a module on CPAN is a real win when it will save time
      • Re: (Score:1)

        by zby (4817)

        Many of those advantages you mention are also available via closures. Other languages don't have true closures - so they have to do that in OO - but we have choice. HOP shows that a more functional approach also works.