Re: AW: Using common object, without passing it around

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 08:16, Steve Bertrand<steve@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thomas Bätzler wrote:
Steve Bertrand <steve@xxxxxxxxxx> asked:
Can anyone suggest a perldoc or recommended practise that will help me
in regards to:

I have numerous classes, all suited to a different object-type or

When I instantiate an object (all classes are under the same Module::
umbrella), I *think* what I want to do is create an 'error' object, but
I want that _specific_ instance of the Error object carried along with
ALL objects created during the time the life-cycle is in operation.

You could use Class::Singleton [1] as a parent of your error handling class. That way, you can instantiate your error handling object in each of your classes in any order you like, and it'll always be the same object.

Nice! That looks like it's exactly what I'm after.

It will certainly save me from passing the object around as a parameter.



I distrust the singleton pattern (there are almost never just one of a
resource), so I tend to go with a caching pattern that yields similar

package Foo;

our %instances;
sub new {
my $class = shift;
my $self = { @_ };

my $key = join "-", @{self}{sort keys %$self};
if (exists $instances{$key}) {
return $instances{$key};
return $instances{$key} = bless $self, $class;

If called with the same arguments it returns the same object. This
means that latter, if you find that you really need two of these
objects instead of [one][2], you can just pass different arguments to
get other instances.

You may also want to read [Design Patterns][1] by Erich Gamma, Richard
Helm, Ralph Johnson and John Vlissides.

[2]: I remember one place where they were using a singleton to
represent the screen, boy were they hosed by the advent of multiple

Chas. Owens
The most important skill a programmer can have is the ability to read.