Luke Palmer wrote:
Unless the caller can't see the signature, as is the case with methods.
[..]
Again, this can't be done unless you know the signature. And in fact,
we can't do type inference on methods unless we do type inference
everywhere, which we can't do if we want an autoloader.
This sounds to me even messier than the C header file mishap,
or even the old K&R days without protoyped declarations!
How can the programmer know about the signature of a method?
I guess from some documentation. And the prime documentation of
an interface is a formal interface definition provided by the
language. This is e.g. what Ada does. Also CORBA is build around
its IDL (Interface Definition Language) and from version 3.0
onwards a CDL (Component Definition Language).
If I understand you correctly the use statement is more like a
linker/loader directive than a compile time interface include?
BTW, is it foreseen to have a clear conceptual split between the
compiler and the loader? Or is that all blurred?
--
TSa (Thomas SandlaÃ)
