Autrijus Tang skribis 2005-05-15 19:28 (+0800): > On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 01:19:53PM +0200, Juerd wrote: > > Or was your choice of words poor, and did you not mean to discuss the > > dot's *default*, but instead a standard way to write the current > > invocant? > I think what Rob suggested is that: > method ($foo) > means > method ($self: $foo)
Then I hereby apologise to Rob for my own poor choice of words. I don't like the idea of having a normal identifier ever used by default, except $_, which is already aliased to the invocant. Juerd -- http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html
