Dan Sugalski wrote:
We can't devolve to isa checking under the hood, because there are
cases where a class can assert that it has a role without pulling in
the role externally. (Storable, for example, will be a likely thing
here as classes assert they do Storable without pulling in an external
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 13:47, Austin Hastings wrote:
> Then in your example:
> The class 'Eh' "does A but does not inherit", did you mean:
>
> class Eh {
> method A1
> method A2
> method A3
> }
Yes.
> I had thought that C (class implicitly= role) had been
> rejected.
I don't remember in p
> -Original Message-
> From: chromatic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 06 May, 2004 04:36 PM
> To: Austin Hastings
> Cc: Perl6 Language List
> Subject: RE: is rw trait's effect on signature
>
>
> On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 13:27, Austin Hastings
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 13:27, Austin Hastings wrote:
> I think we had this discussion a year or two ago, and Damian was opposed to
> the notion that providing the correct methods was equivalent to providing
> the interface or belonging to the class.
>
> His reasoning involved Dog and Tree both sha
> -Original Message-
> From: chromatic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Given:
>
> - class A, a superclass
> - class AB, a subclass of A
> - class Eh, a class that does A but does not inherit
> from it
> - subroutine signature foo(A some_object)
>
> If the sign
At 11:42 AM -0700 5/6/04, chromatic wrote:
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 11:24, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Well... sort of, but only because you've defined that for perl 6
classes automatically do themselves--you've conflated inheritance and
interface. Which is fine, except that it falls down in the face of
o
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 11:24, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Well... sort of, but only because you've defined that for perl 6
> classes automatically do themselves--you've conflated inheritance and
> interface. Which is fine, except that it falls down in the face of
> objects from classes that don't do t
At 11:03 AM -0700 5/6/04, Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 01:52:45PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: At 10:44 AM -0700 5/6/04, chromatic wrote:
: >On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 10:39, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: >
: >> The simple case is:
: >>
: >> sub foo(X $i is rw) {...}
: >> class X {...}
:
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 01:52:45PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: At 10:44 AM -0700 5/6/04, chromatic wrote:
: >On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 10:39, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: >
: >> The simple case is:
: >>
: >>sub foo(X $i is rw) {...}
: >>class X {...}
: >>class Y {...}
: >>my Y $var = 'someth
At 10:44 AM -0700 5/6/04, chromatic wrote:
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 10:39, Aaron Sherman wrote:
The simple case is:
sub foo(X $i is rw) {...}
class X {...}
class Y {...}
my Y $var = 'something';
foo($var);
In this case, something kind of interesting has to hap
On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 10:39, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> The simple case is:
>
> sub foo(X $i is rw) {...}
> class X {...}
> class Y {...}
> my Y $var = 'something';
> foo($var);
>
> In this case, something kind of interesting has to happen.
>
> Either the signature che
At 1:39 PM -0400 5/6/04, Aaron Sherman wrote:
There's a subtle problem / feature resulting from the "is rw" trait that
may be so obvious that I'm making a fool of myself, or it might be that
it's not yet occurred, but I don't recall seeing discussion of it.
The simple case is:
sub foo(X $i
There's a subtle problem / feature resulting from the "is rw" trait that
may be so obvious that I'm making a fool of myself, or it might be that
it's not yet occurred, but I don't recall seeing discussion of it.
The simple case is:
sub foo(X $i is rw) {...}
class X {...}
c
13 matches
Mail list logo
