On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 11:59:15 -0800, Michael Fowler wrote:
>> my Dog $spot;
>> if ($input eq 'Collie') {
>> $spot = Collie->new;
>> } elsif ($input eq 'Dalmation') {
>> $spot = Dalmation->new;
>> }
>>
>> Becuase we're creating two objects when we really only want one.
>
>Yes.
On 1 Sep 2000 20:59:10 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>When omitted, the second argument to C currently defaults to the
>name of the package from which the call is made.
The word "from" doesn't look like it's been used 100% correctly.
"Being called from" suggests that it's the name af the ca
On 1 Sep 2000 20:59:10 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>This RFC proposes that the second argument to C be made
>mandatory, and that its semantics be enhanced slightly to cover a
>common, ugly, and frequently buggy usage.
Ooh, how about this alternative.
There must be an RFC making the curren
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 12:42:52PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> But now you're throwing away the kid with the bathwater.
>
> my Dog $spot;
>
> initially was syntax invented so that $spot was marked as only been ably
> to reference a Dog, with as a result that code internally could be
> opti
Perl6 RFC Librarian sent the following bits through the ether:
> Objects : NEXT pseudoclass for method redispatch
I really like this idea: it's quite simple and gets the job done. I'll
throw some AUTOLOAD ideas at London.pm and see what we come up
with... ;-)
Leon
--
Leon Brocard..
