On Sat, Sep 16, 2000 at 07:26:38PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> My point was more should that be
>
> 'Class'->name
>
> or
>
> Class()->name
I don't get it, lemme start from the beginning:
print "Basset hounds got long Basset::Hounds->thang().";
I'd like that to work out as:
print 'Basset hounds got long '.Basset::Hounds->thang.'.';
but are you suggesting it may do this?
print 'Basset hounds got long '.Basset::Hounds().'->thang.';
Functions don't currently interpolate inside strings. Maybe they
should, but if so definately with a leading &.
I dunno, how common is "word->another_word()" in a string?
Since this seems less obvious than object methods, I'm going to RFC it
seperately.
> But this is definitely useful:
>
> $r = Apache->request;
> print "URI is $r->uri";
Yes, the main concern is that accessor methods work. I can live
without class methods.
> > How's about this?
>
> > BEGIN { $class->require; $class->import } # use $class
>
> I like it. But I'm all RFC'ed out, so it's yours, baby... ;-)
RFC ho!
> [Nate drinks a beer to try and ease the pain of 4 RFC retractions and
> another 22 that just need updating.]
If you're coming to YAPC::Europe, I definately owe you a few beers.
If nothing else than for the hell I've been giving you over here-docs.
--
Michael G Schwern http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just Another Stupid Consultant Perl6 Kwalitee Ashuranse
MORONS!
