Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3481400
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 18, 20262026-05-18T10:26:40+00:00 2026-05-18T10:26:40+00:00

I’d like to create a structured type in Moose that can be used as

  • 0

I’d like to create a structured type in Moose that can be used as the type for another Moose attribute. For example, I’d like to be able to create a name attribute which has its own value and error attributes.

I would therefore like to know the best way of achieving this. I have created a working example by defining a simple Moose class to represent a generic Field object. This has the value and error attributes. I have then created another Moose class for the Person object. This has id and name attributes, both of which are of type Field:

Define a generic field object:

package MyApp::Type::Field;
use Moose;
use namespace::autoclean;

has 'value' => ( is => 'rw' );  
has 'error' => ( is => 'rw', isa => 'Str' );

__PACKAGE__->meta->make_immutable;
1;

Define a Person object which uses the field object:

package MyApp::Person;
use Moose;
use namespace::autoclean;
use MyApp::Type::Field;

has 'id'   => ( is => 'rw', isa => 'MyApp::Type::Field' );    
has 'name' => ( is => 'rw', isa => 'MyApp::Type::Field' );

__PACKAGE__->meta->make_immutable;
1;

Do something with the Person object:

package MyApp::Test;

use Moose;
use namespace::autoclean;
use MyApp::Person;

my $person = MyApp::Person->new();

# This works.
$person->id( MyApp::Type::Field->new() );
$person->id->value( 1 );
$person->id->error( 'Not found' );

# This fails as the name object has not yet been defined.
$person->name->value( 'Dave' );
# Can't call method "value" on an undefined value at ...

__PACKAGE__->meta->make_immutable;
1;

This works, but in MyApp::Test I would like to be able to directly access the value and error attributes of the person’s name and id without first having to instantiate a new MyApp::Type::Field object for each of the person’s attributes.

Or, to put it another way, I’d prefer it if the user of the Person class did not have to do this: $person->id( MyApp::Type::Field->new() ); before being able to use the id attribute.

Is there a nice clean way that I can achieve this?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-18T10:26:40+00:00Added an answer on May 18, 2026 at 10:26 am

    Couldn’t you simply supply a default for the properties?

    has 'id' => (
        is => 'rw',
        isa => 'MyApp::Type::Field',
        default => sub { MyApp::Type::Field->new }
    );
    

    …or do the equivalent in BUILD.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.