On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 11:58:20AM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> First: I don't like the idea of some user supplied code being called
> whenever you declare a new variable, *unless* the author of the class
> created a sub *especially written* for this purpose.
And that's what the RFC states. If the author of Dog doesn't provide a
suitable object constructor, and the user uses my Dog $spot, a fatal
exception is raised.
> Suppose all you want is a variable that can reference existing Dog
> objects, I definitely do not want that a new object that I don't need is
> created, every time I get to the declaration.
>
> Do you really want:
>
> for (1..1000) {
> my Dog $spot;
> }
>
> to create 10000 unused Dog objects? Ugh! (not "Ug")
Then I would say: don't do that.
for (1 .. 1000) {
my $spot;
}
or maybe, for some optimization:
for (1 .. 1000) {
my $spot isa(Foo);
}
> would indeed print "Dog". But that is as far as it should go. At worst,
> in special cases (with "use Fields;", for example), it may be
> initialized to an empty but pre-keyed blessed "hash". Well, that is in
> the view of current class implementation practices. If the objects
> internals for Perl6 become radically different, these ideas should be
>
> But I agree that anything beyond that is simply horrible. You'll only
> drive more people *away* from OO, because it generates so horribly
> inefficient code. If you want a constructor called, than FGS *call* a
> constructor. Maybe you can reduce the syntax necessary to do that, but
> please don't do it behind our backs.
Well then, that's one nay vote. :)
Michael
--
Administrator www.shoebox.net
Programmer, System Administrator www.gallanttech.com
--
