makes me wonder, ifn't such method functions should get a PMC of the class, for which the method was called
Yes... and no.
The class in which the method was found does have to be noted. I stuck a slot in the interpreter struct for it at one point recently, but I'm not sure it survived. That's needed for redispatching, in case a method decides it needs to continue the hierarchy search.
The methods themselves, though, have either been compiled into a class (in which case they already know what class they are) or are generic in which case they shouldn't be touching any attributes of the object, since only methods that were compiled into a class should be able to see that class' attributes.
There's a lot of compile-time data visiblity/hiding stuff implied in the current system that we're assuming but not enforcing at the parrot level. I'll beef up the explanation in PDD15.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
