On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:47:43AM -0500, John Porter wrote: > And isn't this rather off-topic for this list? > Sounds more like an internals thing... No. I think this is an area where the language should lead. I also think we need to define what an 'interface definition' should look like and/or define before we go much further. Tim.
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Johan Vromans
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Dan Sugalski
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Michael G Schwern
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Dan Sugalski
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Michael G Schwern
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Dan Sugalski
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules John Porter
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Dan Sugalski
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules John Porter
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules John Porter
- RE: Really auto autoloaded modules Tim Bunce
- RE: Really auto autoloaded modules Garrett Goebel
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Michael G Schwern
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules John Porter
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules John Porter
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Dave Rolsky
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Dan Sugalski
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules James Mastros
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: Really auto autoloaded modules Damian Conway