On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 06:52:29PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "JNP" == Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> JNP> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 02:22:25PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> In otherwords there should be two methods. One for the user, say
> >> data(), and o
> "JNP" == Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JNP> How about if I rename the new implementation of data() to private(),
JNP> and then reimplement data() without the fancy caller() trick? Would
JNP> that satisfy all parties?
this is just the two method solution proposed by g
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 06:52:29PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> JNP> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 02:22:25PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> In otherwords there should be two methods. One for the user, say
> >> data(), and one for sub-classes that want to ensure data integrity,
> >
> "Joshua" == Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joshua> Heh, I was pondering this all day.
Joshua> Shall I add a note in Event.pod mentioning that data() is
Joshua> meant only for implementors of event watchers?
Yes. I've experienced major frustration with OO documentation tha
> "JNP" == Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JNP> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 02:22:25PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> In otherwords there should be two methods. One for the user, say
>> data(), and one for sub-classes that want to ensure data integrity,
>> say private_d
> "JNP" == Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JNP> It turned out that semaphores were easier than I expected. Now
JNP> that I understand them, I'm even more skeptical that they belong
JNP> in Event. I'm not saying that I would reject an implementation,
JNP> but they seem
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 02:22:25PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 08:02:02AM -0400, Joshua Pritikin wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 11:39:07AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Sure, except that it is not easy to determine the correct package from
> > inside Event::
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 08:02:02AM -0400, Joshua Pritikin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 11:39:07AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sure, except that it is not easy to determine the correct package from
> inside Event::Watcher::init().
>
> I don't know how to fix this, but I can add a warning
Hello,
> Sure, except that it is not easy to determine the correct package from
> inside Event::Watcher::init().
This could be avoided by a global data attribute but well ... I read the discussion of
yesterday again and understand somebody
could have a need for package specific data storage. We
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 07:53:08AM -0400, Joshua Pritikin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 06:54:00AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Graham, I still have an old non-working pm file in the demo directory
> > > that implemented semaphores for Event.
> >
> > non-working ? what broke.
>
> Eve
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 11:39:07AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> thanks for this new release. One remark: it is possible to say now (debugger
>session):
>
> DB<1> $io=Event->io(parked=>1, data=>[qw(a b c d)])
> DB<2> x $io->data
> 0 undef
> DB<3> $io->data([qw(a b c d)])
> DB<4> !
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 06:54:00AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Graham, I still have an old non-working pm file in the demo directory
> > that implemented semaphores for Event.
>
> non-working ? what broke.
Everything. I don't think it's been updated since Event 0.02.
--
"Never ascribe
Hello,
thanks for this new release. One remark: it is possible to say now (debugger session):
DB<1> $io=Event->io(parked=>1, data=>[qw(a b c d)])
DB<2> x $io->data
0 undef
DB<3> $io->data([qw(a b c d)])
DB<4> !2
0 ARRAY(0x23e444)
0 'a'
1 'b'
2 'c'
3 'd'
Tha
13 matches
Mail list logo
