On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 03:42:31AM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Ovid wrote:
: My apologies if these have been answered. I've been chatting with
: Jonathan Worthington about some of this and any misconceptions are
: mine, not his.
:
: In reading through S12, I see that .can() returns an iterator
Larry Wall wrote:
The fundamental problem here is that we're forcing a method name to be
represented as a string. We're basically missing the foo equivalent
for methods. Maybe we need to allow the indirection on method names
too:
if $obj.fribble:(Str -- BadPoet) {
Takes a little
Larry Wall wrote:
Maybe we need to allow the indirection on method names too:
if $obj.fribble:(Str -- BadPoet) {
-snip-
Note that we already define foo:(Int, Str) to return a list of candidates
if there's more than one, so extending this from the multi dispatcher
to the single
My apologies if these have been answered. I've been chatting with
Jonathan Worthington about some of this and any misconceptions are
mine, not his.
In reading through S12, I see that .can() returns an iterator for the
methods matched. What I'm curious about is this:
if $obj.can('fribble') {
Ovid wrote:
My apologies if these have been answered. I've been chatting with
Jonathan Worthington about some of this and any misconceptions are
mine, not his.
In reading through S12, I see that .can() returns an iterator for the
methods matched. What I'm curious about is this:
if
On Apr 29, 2007, at 6:42 , Jonathan Lang wrote:
In effect, the signature gets attached as a property of the string,
and 'can()' checks for the signature property.
The only problem that I have with this idea is that I can't think of
any uses for a signatory string outside of '.can()'.
Maybe
