Re: RFC 189 (v1) Objects : Hierarchical calls to initializersanddestructors

[Graham Barr]

On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 11:09:18AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> >    > But I've gotta nitpick the name. I wonder if BLESS wouldn't be better?
> >    > print calls PRINT, printf calls PRINTF, even if the subs don't do any
> >    > printing. Sure makes it easier to see what's going on, to me at least.
> > 
> > But BLESS doesn't do blessing. It does set-up. So it's called SETUP. :-)
> > 
> > I'm certainly not averse to a better name -- INIT would be ideal, if it
> > weren't already spoken for -- but I think BLESS would be misleading.
> 
> How about ONBLESS? Which admittedly suffers from not being a verb, but
> conveys the meaning rather well. I'm not entirely sure I *like* it,
> just tossing out another suggestion.

Given that is happens when bless is called and that all other builtin
methods are anmed after what is being called, not what it is being used
for, then I would say that it should be called BLESS for consistancy reason.

this may seem confusing because you are thinking of one particular use
that you have in mind for this, but in a generic sense it is a method
that is called when bless is called.

Graham.