>sub replace_sub_for_instance {
> my ($object, $subroutine_name, $new_subroutine) = @_;
> no strict 'refs';
> my $old_subroutine = \&$subroutine_name
> or die "Subroutine $subroutine_name not found";
> my $object_name = refaddr($object);
> *$subroutine_name = sub {
> my $self = $_[0];
> if (refaddr($self) eq $object_name) {
> goto $new_subroutine;
> }
> else {
> goto $old_subroutine;
> }
> };
>}
>
>Note that I was careful not to capture the object of interest in the
>subroutine because I didn't want to mess up a DESTROY.
I'm just a tad confused about that last bit.
There may be advantages to using goto over recalling the method,
but I'm not sure how shifting the object off @_ will mess up a DESTROY call.
If the original call was $inst->method2(...);
then $inst will point to the object during the entire method2 call,
which means if I keep a copy during the call, it shouldnt' be a problem.
The reference count cant reach zero until sometime after method2
returns and $inst gets a new value, and the instance gets garbage
collected.
Either that, or I haven't had enough caffeine today.
Greg
_______________________________________________
Boston-pm mailing list
Boston-pm@mail.pm.org
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
