> Subject: Re: Catchall proposal > David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: <snip> > To flesh this out a bit more, I propose the following handlers: > > has(id) > hasMissing(id) > get(id) > getMissing(id) > set(id, val) > setMissing(id, val) > invoke(id, args) > invokeMissing(id, args) > delete(id) > call(args) > new(args) >
Would it be worth splitting the above into two separate proposals? Proposal #1) Hooks for only missing actions. Proposal #2) Pre/Post Hooks for existing actions. I would expect that the goals for each of the two proposals would be slightly different. The focus of #1 would be to enhance the run-time metaprogramming facilities The focus of #2 would be to enhance the security/correctness (visibility, pre/post conditions, design by contract) of programs and support aspect-oriented programming. That way, one doesn't get mired by the other ;) Any thoughts? (i.e. are these two proposals far too intertwined to separate them) thanks, Faisal Vali Radiation Oncology Loyola _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
