On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:55:11 +0300, Alexey Trofimenko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> P.S. I have one (almost unrelated to topic) observation: if sigil is a
> part of a variable name, then C< Package::$var > makes more sense than
> perl5 C< $Package::var >. (AFAIK, PHP5 works this way) And this requires
> less magic from perl.
I agree... that's inconsistent.
I have another question: Are package/class/grammar namespaces valid
objects in Perl6? I would assume yes, so you can call methods on them
for meta-purposes.
Would there be a default Namespace::postcircumfix:«< >» operator,
which would make the above code look like: Package<$var> aka
Package.<$var>? This would continue to make sense even when the
namespace objects are passed to a function:
sub foo (Class $who) {
my $thing := $who<$var>;
my &func := $who<&func>; # how would I do this otherwise?
}
I assume the second line can't really be done through stringification
due to singletons. Well, on second thought, you could make $foo.meta
(or whatever) start answering to CLASS(0xDEADBEEF) style classnames.
Those are probably needed for debugging or something anyways.
Ashley Winters
