On Mar 6, 7:53 am, "chris_sny...@sra.com" <chris_sny...@sra.com> wrote: > I don't understand Puppet Language. How can you take object-oriented > constructs such as 'class' and 'inheritance' and then not allow things like > multiple instances of a class, albeit with differing parameters.
That would be a travesty, but it's not what Puppet has done. Instead, Puppet has taken entirely different constructs and named them in a manner that confuses you. You know, just to keep you on your toes. > Defined > resource types don't help me as they don't have inheritance (which is > something I very much want). No, you don't. Or at least, the object-oriented kind of inheritance that you think you want is not available from Puppet, so the fact that neither defined types nor classes offer it does not distinguish between the two. Puppet's class inheritance is designed expressly for allowing the properties of resources declared in a superclass to be overridden by a subclass. Even that probably excites the OO programmer in you more than it should. In practice, overriding resource properties is never more than a convenience. Puppet offers several alternatives, some of them cleaner. Supposing that you're a good OO programmer, you will be aware of the classic question of inheritance vs. composition. In my experience, the better choice in OO programming is more often "composition" than many practitioners recognize, but in Puppet DSL, "composition" is *almost always* the better choice. John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
