On Jul 23, 2009, at 12:03 AM, Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 08:54:08PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
My only issue with this is that methods are not really parts of
packages, methods are class things. Perhaps we could call it
code_ref_map or something better so we can get the actual
functionality,
and then Role and Class can just alias them to method_mao or
something
like that?
The only reason I didn't do this is because every consumer of this API
(CMOP::Class, Moose::Role) cares about methods, not 'subroutines',
so it seemed
like drawing a distinction that, while valid, would be currently
useless.
If the plan is for CMOP::Package to grow more extensive exporting/
inclusion
functionality, I could see more value. It still may make sense for an
intermediate module that is "a package containing subs intended to
be called as
methods", but I have no idea what that would be called.
"Module", it is already there a Module isa Package and a Class isa
Module.
- Stevan
