Re: Ramblings on "base class" for SV etc.

[Nick Ing-Simmons]

Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Nick Ing-Simmons writes:
>: Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: >Hmm, will vtbl get rid of all the magic hacks?
>: 
>: The "mg.c" 'magic hacks' are in essence applying vtable semantics (they 
>: are even called vtables in the sources) to a subset of "values".
>
>Well, yes, but there's a linked list of them to allow for MI of
>magical methods.
>
>: So yes vtables mean evrything is "magic" so nothing needs "special magic"...
>
>Er, you still have to think about whether something could be tied and
>tainted at the same time.

True. My point was that will all be handled by what happens to be 
in the variables vtable. So the complexities of magic become complexities
of setting the vtable rather than needing 

  if (SvGMAGICAL(sv)) {
    mg_get(sv);
  }

all over the source _as well_ as vtable stuff.

-- 
Nick Ing-Simmons