Larry Wall wrote: > This is basically a non-problem. Junctions have one public method, > .eigenstates, which is vanishingly unlikely to be used by accident by > any mere mortal any time in the next 100 years, give or take a year. > If someone does happen to be programming quantum mechanics in Perl 6, > they're probably smart enough to work around the presence of a > reserved--well, it's not even a reserved word-- a reserved method name.
Actually, the problem isn't with '.eigenstates'; the problem is with '.perl'. If I'm viewing a Junction of items as a single indeterminate item, I'd expect $J.perl to return a Junction of the items' perl by default. Admittedly though, even that isn't much of an issue, seeing as how you _can_ get that result by saying something to the effect of "Junction of $J.eigenstates.«perl" - the only tricky part being how to decide which kind of junction to use (e.g., any, all, one, none) when putting the perl-ized eigenstates back together. (And how _would_ you do that?) This would represent another corner-case where the programmer would be tripped up by a simplistic understanding of what a Junction is; but being a corner-case, that's probably acceptable. -- Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
