On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 12:37:33AM -0700, Trey Harris wrote:
> I misstated my worry here. In this case, by the same rule that "my Dog
> $foo" gets the right version because the longname is aliased to the
> shortname in the lexical scope of the use, it would work.
>
> What I'm actually concerned
Oops, Luke Palmer alerted me to the fact that I screwed up in the below.
In a message dated Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Trey Harris writes:
My question is, if a program is running where two versions of Dog are loaded,
say 1.3.4 and 2.1, and a file contains:
use Dog-1.3.4-cpan:JRANDOM;
class Poodle is
In a message dated Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
But, assuming for the moment that C autoloads C,
does that mean that
class Dog is Mammal-4.5
is valid?
Yes, it must be valid. See
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S11.html#Versioning :
So you can just say
m
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:25:26PM -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> In S12, we see a number examples of:
>
> class Dog is Mammal
> http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S12.html
>
> However, it's not clear if it is necessary to preload Mammal for Dog
> to function properly here, or what that
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> In S12, we see a number examples of:
>
>class Dog is Mammal
>http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S12.html
>
> However, it's not clear if it is necessary to preload Mammal for Dog
> to function properly here, or what that syntax would be.
>
In S12, we see a number examples of:
class Dog is Mammal
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S12.html
However, it's not clear if it is necessary to preload Mammal for Dog
to function properly here, or what that syntax would be.
Testing with current version of pugs, this doesn't happen.
