On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 09:53:59PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 05:32:44AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: : # Type Instantiation?
: : sub apply (fun::a returns ::b, ::a $arg) returns ::b {
: : fun($arg);
: : }
:
: The first parameter would be fun:(::a)
With the recent discussion on type sigils, and the fact that Pugs
is moving toward the OO core, I'd like to inquire how the following
statements evaluate (or not):
# Compile time type arithmetic?
::Dual ::= ::Str | ::Num;
$*Dual ::= ::Str | ::Num;
# Run time type arithmetic?
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 05:06:15PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: With the recent discussion on type sigils, and the fact that Pugs
: is moving toward the OO core, I'd like to inquire how the following
: statements evaluate (or not):
:
: # Compile time type arithmetic?
: ::Dual ::= ::Str |
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 05:32:44AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: # Type Instantiation?
: sub apply (fun::a returns ::b, ::a $arg) returns ::b {
: fun($arg);
: }
The first parameter would be fun:(::a) these days, but yes.
(Stylistically, I'd leave the off the call.)
So, the
Autrijus Tang wrote:
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 05:32:44AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: # Type Instantiation?
: sub apply (fun::a returns ::b, ::a $arg) returns ::b {
: fun($arg);
: }
The first parameter would be fun:(::a) these days, but yes.
(Stylistically, I'd leave the off the
