Larry Wall wrote:
A multi sub presents only an MMD interface, while a multi method presents
both MMD and SMD interfaces. In this case, there's not much point in the
SMD inteface since .. used as infix is always going to call the MMD interface.
So:
multi method : MMD and SMD
multi sub: MMD
We were discussing some confusing macro behaviours, when we came upon
this curious thing. This code is really simple in p5, as it doesn't
really have separate compilation, but in p6, the modules can be pre-
compiled or cached.
8--
module ImportHeadache;
my $m;
sub
One way to think of your macro example (instead of the -import one,
which is harder to define, i think):
Every time you use a module it's used by the compiler, and by the
emitted code.
The compiler loads the macros, the emitted code loads the non-macro
stuff.
Since the clsoure is created in the
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 15:13:07 +0200, Zohar Kelrich wrote:
We were discussing some confusing macro behaviours, when we came upon this
curious thing. This code is really simple in p5, as it doesn't really have
separate compilation, but in p6, the modules can be pre- compiled or cached.
On 3/2/06, Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can subs be declared within classes? Can methods be declared without
classes? If the answers to both of these questions are no, then it
occurs to me that you _could_ unify the two under a single name, using
the class boundary as the
Stevan Little wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Can subs be declared within classes? Can methods be declared without
classes?
I would say yes.
Having subs inside classes makes creating small utility functions
easier. You could also use private methods for this, but if I dont
need to pass the
On 3/2/06, Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stevan Little wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Can subs be declared within classes? Can methods be declared without
classes?
I would say yes.
Having subs inside classes makes creating small utility functions
easier. You could also
Stevan Little wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Steven Little wrote:
$object does unattached_method;
^Object does unattached_method;
(Wouldn't that be ^$object does unattached_method;?)
No, I am attaching the method (well role really) to the class ^Object.
There is no such thing as
