Steffen Schwigon ha scritto:
Hi!
gabriele renzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi everyone!
I solved the (easy) problem 32, implementing gcd($a,$b).
You can check the code in the repository or on the web[1]
I looked at [1]. What's the purpose of "multi" in this case?
(Maybe you wanted to write it as more than one subs, did you?)
look the comment:
# Yet, it should be possible to define it even for commutative rings
# other than Integers, so we use a multi sub.
I think that in these examples we should respect the old good
programmin' habits, including the "stay open for extension" idea.
If we'd use a normal sub we would limit all the future user of gcd
(which I expect to be legions ;) to using Int.
<snip>
Could someone explain me what is the expected behaviour?
Last time I experimented with this, the type system in Pugs looked
unfinished. Type constraints were syntactically accepted but worked
similar to typeless code in Perl5. I'm not sure about the current
state.
I see
Anyway, in your example I hadn't expected a value coercion (from 10.1
to 10), but something like an error if the type doesn't match.
this is what I'd like to see too, since I think it could help avoiding
casual errors, and the extensibility of the system is still safe because
of the multi things.
But I remember reading that, by default, perl6 will try to autocoerce
arguments.
--
blog en: http://www.riffraff.info
blog it: http://riffraff.blogsome.com
jabber : rff.rff at gmail dot com
