Sorry to reply to the wrong comment, but I lost the original thread in my mail archives and didn't notice this until now.
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:54 PM, John M. Dlugosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote: > > > > > The fundamental flaw of metric mmd is that it trades degrees of > > specificity. Consider the subtype chain E <: D <: C <: B <: A > > where the rule is that having an E it is better handled by a > > method dealing with a D than one dealing with an A. The same > > is the case for having a D being better handled by a C than an > > A method. Now consider a multi with the two signatures :(A,C,C) > > and :(D,A,A) and a call with (E,D,D) that goes to :(D,A,A) since > > 7 < 8. But note that it handles the two Ds as As instead of Cs > > as in single dispatch. Is this right? (E,D,D) to (A,C,C) is (4,1,1), with a L1 metric of 6. (E,D,D) to (D,A,A) is (1,3,3) with an L1 metric of 7. Are you sure (E,D,D) would bind to (D,A,A)?
