Sex, 2008-05-02 às 21:49 +0200, TSa escreveu:
> Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > In fact, it simply means that it's up to that object's metaobject to
> > answer that, and not to a supra-meta-model to be able to answer to all
> > of the possible metamodel implementations.
> Since all three forms are derived from a programmer's declaration
> involving names the problem is simple lookup, indeed. The fact that
> N objects share one meta object is just for reducing the memory
> footprint. You could make every object carry the full meta info
> around.

And more importantly, the fact is that they *can* carry the full meta
info around, and even more importantly, they might even build completely
different set of features.

> > You can do that as "shortcuts" and "optimizations" that are indeed
> > needed in order to actually bootstrap the system, but that's not what
> > the type system is.
> Would you be so kind to enlighten me what the type system is, if
> not a type calculation overlaid over a value calculation?

I think that migth be the key point to understand our disagreement.
There's no such thing as *the* Perl 6 type system, there's *a default*
type system declared in the spec, but what Perl 6 has is a *meta object
protocol* that allows you to deal with several type systems at once.


Reply via email to