On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 08:02:00PM +1000, Stuart Cook wrote: > What's the current meaning of type annotations on type-variables? > > For example, if I say... > > my Foo ::x; > > ...which of these does it mean? > > a) ::x (<=) ::Foo (i.e. any type assigned to x must be covariant wrt. Foo) > b) ::x is an object of type Foo, where Foo.does(Class) > c) Something else?
My current reading is a) -- but only if ::x stays implicitly "is constant". So your "assigned" above should read "bound". > Also, can I do crazy stuff like this? > > my $a = ::Foo; > my ::$a $obj; # analogous to @$x, where $x is an arrayref Note that $a at compile time is unbound, so that automatically fails. Now had you written this: my $a ::= ::Foo; my ::$a $obj; Then I can see it working. Thanks, /Autrijus/
Description: PGP signature