Thanks a lot for the advice! I'll factor this into my thinking and see what I come up with.
James On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 07:07 PM, david wrote: > James Edward Gray II wrote: > >> >> On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 05:15 PM, david wrote: >> >>> just curious: >>> if you want child's functionality, why wouldn't you want to have the >>> child >>> object in the first place? >> >> Glad, you asked; I would love a second opinion! My server manages >> vanilla Telnet connections with a Connection object. All the Telnet >> protocol stuff is in an easily replaced method though, for >> subclassing. >> I want to keep it so Telnet is always supported, and thus the >> default >> connection type. But connections can be upgraded to a higher >> protocol, >> if they ask for it. That's why I thought it would be cool to just >> upgrade the object reference when the request comes in. Tell me if >> you >> see chinks in that suit of armor though, I'm all ears. >> >> James > > forgive me if i am wrong but you basically have: > > 1. a server of some kind > 2. this server uses the Connection object(class) > 3. the Connection object has a method that handles the Telnet protocol > 4. when you subclass Connection, you still want your Connection object > to > still be able to handle the Telnet protocol but also be able to handle > the > protocol that the child class is designed to handle > 5. this way your Connection object not only handles the Telnet > protocal(because it already know that from the beginning) but also the > child class's protocal(because you upgrade Connection to the child > class). > > if that's what you want, i really don't see any advantage of doing > this. > you are basically making the parent back to the child but the child is > already a parent! instead of subclassing Connection, i would just > decouple > Connection into 2 separate modules: one for handling the actual Telnet > protocal(really genertic) and another one for handling connection to > the > Telnet protocal so you will have: > > 1. a class(call it TelnetPro) for handling the Telnet protocal only. > 2. subclass TelnetPro into Connect for handling connection for Telnet > > now say that you want to add HTTP support to your server, you will code > another class(call it HTTPPro) for handling the HTTP protocal and > subclass(yes, multiple inheritence) Connect from it again. hopefully > all > you have to change is one line in Connect from: > > @ISA=qw(Exporter TelnetPro); > > to: > > @ISA=qw(Exporter TelnetPro HTTPPro); > > all the sudden, Connect knows how to handle Telnet as well as HTTP. as > you > add more and more protocal support, you will keep adding to Connect's > @ISA > to support those. > > this might not work depends on the actual spec and requirment of the > project > that you are working on. just my 2cent :-) > > david > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
