Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Larry Wall wrote: > > > On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:22:07PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote: > > : Does this mean private methods will be called like this? > > : > > : ./:method() > > > > No, I think that's still just > > > > .:method() > > This missing design rationale here is that the colon acts as part of the unary > operator: > > ./ unary public-method-call-on-invocant > > .: unary private-method-call-on-invocant
This introduces some asymmetry with accessors, which are currently $.attr and $:attr. I think in this case it's more consistent to use the $/attr for public attributes. Unfortunately, I find that rather ugly, which is why I gave up trying to find a secondary sigil for public methods called on the invocant in the first place. In other words, I don't see any solution here that is less than ideal. Any thoughts? -- matt diephouse http://matt.diephouse.com
