Timothy S. Nelson wrote:
* Should there be a way to extract information about a Rat's
numerator/denominator? What methods does a Rat have?
Rat.avoid_trap(), Rat.eatcheese(), Rat.race(), etc. Oh, wait,
*that* kind of Rat :).
Don't forget that a Rat can have at least one other good
Em Qui, 2009-03-05 às 18:43 -0800, Jon Lang escreveu:
OK; let me get a quick clarification here. How does:
say Hello, World!;
This is the equivalent to
say.postcircumfix:( )( \(Hello, World) );
differ from:
Hello, World!.say;
This is just
Hello, World!.say;
Meaning, the first
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 12:15:18PM +1100, Timothy S. Nelson wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Also, I personally would prefer to not see explicit typing
on the invocants to most methods.
Agreed. I wonder what I was thinking :).
Although, interestingly, if the method
HaloO,
Daniel Ruoso wrote:
Em Qui, 2009-03-05 às 18:43 -0800, Jon Lang escreveu:
And more generally, would there be a
reasonable way to write a single routine (i.e., implementation) that
could be invoked by a programmer's choice of these calling
conventions, without redirects (i.e., code
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
Although, interestingly, if the method is exported as a multi it
should automatically add in the current role or class as a constraint
on the (former) invocant so that multi dispatch will not overgeneralize.
I would expect
class Foo
{
method bar {...}
Em Sex, 2009-03-06 às 18:51 +0100, TSa escreveu:
I know that the use of 'is also' is called monkey patching but I can't
understand why this is regarded as a bad thing. Having a class assembled
from multiple modules is a rather normal affair.
You're describing Roles here, which is something you
