Re: More on Roles, .does(), and .isa() (was Re: Quick OO .isa question)

2005-07-21 Thread TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)
chromatic wrote: On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 18:47 +0200, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote: I strongly agree. They should share the same namespace. Since code objects constitute types they also share this namespace. This means that any two lines of class Foo {...} roleFoo {...} sub Foo {...}

Re: More on Roles, .does(), and .isa() (was Re: Quick OO .isa question)

2005-07-19 Thread TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)
HaloO chromatic, you wrote: Have I mentioned before that I think you should be able to say: class Foo { method foo { ... } method more_foo { ... } } class Bar does Foo { method foo { ... } } ... probably get a compile-time error that Bar doesn't support more_foo()?

More on Roles, .does(), and .isa() (was Re: Quick OO .isa question)

2005-07-11 Thread chromatic
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 17:47 -0400, Stevan Little wrote: I actually agree with you on that. But I would like to clarify it to say that: Foo.isa(Bar) # Foo.meta.isa(Bar) || Foo.meta.does(Bar) ... meaning that the .isa() which is supposed to be aliased into the class from .meta is