Re: RFC: overriding methods declared by roles (Was: Re: Reusing code: Everything but the kitchen sink)

2009-07-13 Thread Ovid
- Original Message From: Jon Lang datawea...@gmail.com Right. But as they were originally conceived, they were interfaces that could also handle code reuse, rather than units of code reuse that could also be used as interfaces. From this perspective, it makes perfect sense that a

RFC: overriding methods declared by roles (Was: Re: Reusing code: Everything but the kitchen sink)

2009-07-12 Thread Daniel Ruoso
Em Sex, 2009-07-10 às 15:39 -0700, Jon Lang escreveu: The key to understanding roles is to note that roles don't implement methods; classes implement methods. Er, while I see your point, Roles are not just interfaces... they are OO components that can be plugged into other classes. They often

Re: RFC: overriding methods declared by roles (Was: Re: Reusing code: Everything but the kitchen sink)

2009-07-12 Thread David Green
On 2009-Jul-12, at 12:43 pm, Daniel Ruoso wrote: role R1 { method foo() {...} # degenerates to interface } Just wondering: since merely declaring an interface will be common enough, should we be able to say simply method foo; inside a role, and drop the {...}? class Bla does R2 {

Re: RFC: overriding methods declared by roles (Was: Re: Reusing code: Everything but the kitchen sink)

2009-07-12 Thread Jon Lang
Daniel Ruoso wrote: Jon Lang wrote: The key to understanding roles is to note that roles don't implement methods; classes implement methods. Er, while I see your point, Roles are not just interfaces... they are OO components that can be plugged into other classes. They often are used for