Well, this one isn't actually something that changes control flow. It's
more of an object with rich behaviour that a method can hand back to its
caller, who can work with it in more ways than your usual return value.
It is, like most things these days, intended to be a base class that an
author can subclass to get specialized extra behaviour for an
application-specific return value object. Would Class::ReturnValue
make sense?
-j
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:12:01AM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 09:09:11PM -0800, William R Ward wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perl Authors Upload Server) writes:
> > > modid: Return::Value
> > > Return::Value is an object which encapsulates most of the standard
> > > behaviors for function/method return values. It allows a function to
> > > return an object that is treated as a boolean in boolean context, as
> > > an array in array context and as a rich object if the caller wants
> > > to use advanced features such as stack traces or lists of warnings
> > > or complex return datatypes.
> >
> > I don't think that a "Return" top-level namespace is a very good
> > choice for this.. How about (something)::ReturnValue, for some
> > reasonable value of (something)?
>
> Umm, in the 'control flow' section of the module list we currently have
>
> * AtExit - atexit() function to register exit-callbacks
> * Callback - Define easy to use function callback objects
> * Hook::PrePostCall - Add actions before and after a routine
> * Memoize - Cache results of individual function calls
> * Religion - Control where you go when you die()/warn()
>
> It's kind'a tempting to propose a ControlFlow:: category.
> Most/all of the above would have fitted in there nicely
> (usually a sign of a good name).
>
> So how about ControlFlow::ReturnValue ?
>
> Tim.
>
--
jesse reed vincent -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
70EBAC90: 2A07 FC22 7DB4 42C1 9D71 0108 41A3 3FB3 70EB AC90
<lamont> I'm reasonably sure that at least two of the electric blue kangeroos
I saw were real.
