On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:28:23PM +0200, Juerd wrote: : Autrijus asked me to summarize here what I said on IRC #perl6, and ask : Larry for another "that's all correct". : : I've rephrased everything as facts/assumptions. : : Array context, as provided by a signature of "Array $foo", is still : a form of scalar context, even though Array.isa(List).
I don't think Array.isa(List). I think List.isa(Array of Generator), and Array.maybehasa(List) stored under it's .specs property for generating more values of the Array if you run off the end of the existing elements. : Array is a class here. Yes. : Classes when used for context expect objects. If by "context" you mean variable declaration, then yes. : Objects are references. Objects are blessed referents, just as in Perl 5. It's just that most such referents are an opaque type now. I think what you're trying to say here is that Real Objectsâ are never value types, which is true. Objects are always accessed through references, as in Perl 5. : Array implies ref. Yes, though people don't have to realize that when they say @foo[$bar]. : The main contexts, void, scalar and list, have nothing to do with : types. That's a slight overstatement, but mostly true. : Scalar context can expect a certain type of value, for example, an : Array or a Dog. Yes. : List context can also expect a certain type of values for its : elements. Right. : Somewhere during our conversation, I suggested renaming scalar and list : context to singular and plural context, to avoid all the confusion. I often talk about them in those terms, but I'd hate to have to type "singular" instead of "scalar" or "plural" instead of "list" all the time. : Void context still exists and is not a form of singular or plural : context. Perhaps this should be called nullar context, although void : context works equally well for me and is not confusing because we have : no Void type. So let's get just rid of Scalar and List types. : When we really want a scalar (the thing itself), we call that Any : context or Scalar context, both forms of singular context (formerly : called scalar context). : : What exactly is the difference between Scalar and Any? Isn't any, that I can tell. So maybe we settle on Any for the type and scalar() for the function/concept. It'd be nice if we could unify those somehow, but any() is taken. Maybe Item/item(). Likewise, there's really no such thing as a List. The basic list types are actually Eager and Lazy, and an Array conveniently contains one of each. Larry
