At 4:00 PM -0700 5/23/07, Jonathan Lang wrote:
I see no mention of C<@@x> in this section. I would assume that
C<@@x> may be bound to any object that does the C
role, with a note to the effect that the C role does
the C role (and thus anything that C<@x> may be bound to,
C<@@x> may also be bound
Darren Duncan wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
>I see no mention of C<@@x> in this section. I would assume that
>C<@@x> may be bound to any object that does the C
>role, with a note to the effect that the C role does
>the C role (and thus anything that C<@x> may be bound to,
>C<@@x> may also be bound
Perhaps it's better to think of '@' and '@@' as working with different
contexts. S02 says that there are three main contexts (void, scalar,
and list); that scalar context has a number of "sub-contexts"
(boolean, integer, number, and string), and that list context has a
number of sub-contexts base
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 04:33:23PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: >From S02:
:
: --
:
: Perl 6 includes a system of B to mark the fundamental
: structural type of a variable:
:
:$ scalar (object)
:@ ordered array
:% unordered hash (associative array)
:& code/rule/token/reg
Whoops, quoted but forgot to answer first question...
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 04:33:23PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Perl 6 includes a system of B to mark the fundamental
: structural type of a variable:
:
:$ scalar (object)
:@ ordered array
:% unordered hash (associative arra
Larry Wall wrote:
Well, it's already too easy, but the problem I have with it is not
that. My problem is that sigil:<@> is the name of a very specific
syntactic notion, while Positional is the name of a very generic
semantic notion. I don't think those levels should be confused.
Fair enough.
At 1:30 PM -0700 5/24/07, Larry Wall wrote:
Yes, provided we consider Junction and Any to both be subtypes of Object.
All this time, I was thinking that "Any" and "Object" were
synonymous, that Any is a symbolic|syntactic alias for Object, and
Any is not a subtype of Object.
Object is the m
