Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since PIR behaviour is ours to define, it can do whatever we want. > I'm inclined to rule that a plain
> bar() > is equivalent to: > current_namespace::bar() > and as such the PIR compiler should look up the function by name in > the current namespace and then invoke it. Ok. So this "bar" is overridable by putting another Sub object into the "bar" slot of the namespace, I presume... > Since invoking a sub in the current file's also useful and something > we do (I'm making heavy use of it. It's nice :) I can see having > alternate syntax for it. Perhaps: > :bar() > looks for the bar sub in the current namespace in the current file > and invokes it, skipping any sort of by-name lookup or runtime sub > overriding. ... while this one would reflect the current static behavior of subs defined in the current namespace, which translates just to a constant table lookup: set_p_pc Px, the_sub_PMC_named_bar > (And yeah, I suggest this even though it'd mean rewriting some of my > compiler's codegen code) > Any semantics past these (simple lookup by name, and simple > compiletime lookup) should be delegated to the individual language > compilers, and they can emit code to do whatever oddball things they > may need to do, though I'm not sure there's a whole lot more that'd > need to be done for most languages. (Especially since namespaces are > supposed to be lexically and dynamically overridable, as well as > layered, but that's all a separate thing) Currently a C< bar() > function call shortcut emits: Px = find_name "bar" when "bar" isn't known in the current namespace, which looks into lexicals, globals, and builtins in that order. > -- Dan leo
