On 1/20/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note, by the way, that JS has primitive strings, and Strings, only the
latter being objects. Fortunately for us, though, a string is
automatically promoted to a String when the string is USED AS an object.
In other words, according to userland,
Hello,
I am forking this off the Perl 6 OO and bless thread since that
seems to have gotten bogged down in what it all means to Perl 5
interoperability. This was not really my intent with the original
thread, but I think it is still a fruitful discussion so I will re-
make my original
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 15:45 (-0500):
class Foo {
method new ($class: %params) {
$class.bless(%params);
Wouldn't that be %params.bless($class), or more directly,
%params.blessed = $class?
This *won't* work the same in Perl 6 though. This is because,
what is
To further extend Steve's argument (which I wholeheartedly agree
with), I wanted to point out one thing: bless has nothing to do with
OO programming as conceived of in Perl6. It does one thing and only
one thing:
- tag a reference with a package name.
This is used in a few places:
- to
On Thursday 19 January 2006 13:10, Rob Kinyon wrote:
bless was a brilliant idea for Perl5. It's wrong for Perl6.
Perhaps you meant to write Tagging a reference with a package name worked for
Perl 5. It's wrong for Perl 6.
Certainly I can agree with that.
Yet this whole discussion feels like
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 16:10 (-0500):
There are no references in Perl6.
When you said that one can't use OO in Perl 5, I had something to say
because it's a recurring subject.
I have to admit, though, that I've never seen this statement, or
anything implying it. It's entirely new to me.
Juerd skribis 2006-01-19 22:18 (+0100):
Could you live with @foo being an array, and @foo in scalar context
returning a reference to that array? And with arrays being interfaces to
underlying Arrays, which are objects, which makes arrays non-objects
that can be used *as* objects?
This turns
On Jan 19, 2006, at 4:10 PM, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Packages don't have anything to do with the class
system.
Actually ^Class.isa(^Package) ;)
Stevan
Juerd,
On Jan 19, 2006, at 4:10 PM, Juerd wrote:
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 15:45 (-0500):
class Foo {
method new ($class: %params) {
$class.bless(%params);
Wouldn't that be %params.bless($class), or more directly,
%params.blessed = $class?
Nope, according to S12:
Juerd,
On Jan 19, 2006, at 4:21 PM, Juerd wrote:
Juerd skribis 2006-01-19 22:18 (+0100):
Could you live with @foo being an array, and @foo in scalar context
returning a reference to that array? And with arrays being
interfaces to
underlying Arrays, which are objects, which makes arrays
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 16:59 (-0500):
But we cannot automagically inject a role into a class, for a number
of reasons.
1) thats just plain evil
But then, so is bless, so the two can play along.
2) what if the role conflicts with other roles being does-ed by Foo?
Debugging hell
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 17:06 (-0500):
This turns everything is an object into everything can be used with
OO syntax, which I think is more true
Alternatively and simultaneously, everything represents an object.
Well, if everything is NOT an object, then the synopsis need to
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 11:07:49PM +0100, Juerd wrote:
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 16:59 (-0500):
2) what if the role conflicts with other roles being does-ed by Foo?
Debugging hell there.
Very good point.
Aren't role conflicts resolved at composition time (possibly by
failure)?
On Jan 19, 2006, at 5:09 PM, Juerd wrote:
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 17:06 (-0500):
This turns everything is an object into everything can be used
with
OO syntax, which I think is more true
Alternatively and simultaneously, everything represents an object.
Well, if everything is NOT
On Jan 19, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 11:07:49PM +0100, Juerd wrote:
Stevan Little skribis 2006-01-19 16:59 (-0500):
2) what if the role conflicts with other roles being does-ed by Foo?
Debugging hell there.
Very good point.
Aren't role conflicts
On 1/19/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 16:10 (-0500):
There are no references in Perl6.
I have to admit, though, that I've never seen this statement, or
anything implying it. It's entirely new to me.
Is your Perl the same as that of other people on this
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 20:54 (-0500):
There are no references in Perl6.
Is your Perl the same as that of other people on this list? :)
There are no references in Perl6 in the way Perl5 conceives of references.
There are references in Perl 6.
Do note that @foo evaluates to a
17 matches
Mail list logo
