On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Rob Kinyon wrote:
I'd like to take this moment and point to my somewhat hand-wavy
metamodel proposal from last week. When Stevan and I were talking
about this, we called it a quark. Atom also works quite nicely,
but quarks are cooler.
They're also colorful. Does this mean
On 10/26/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:35:05PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
: On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 21:58 -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
:
: Plus, the argument is a straw man. Instead of:
:
: class Some::Class is also {
: }
:
: you would do:
:
:
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
: Yes, and dispatch as a runtime keyed access into a code multitude.
: The covariant part of the method's sig! The code equivalent to keyed
: data access into hashes.
Um, yeah. Won't play in Peoria, though.
Where or what is Peoria?
What I mean with the covariant
On 10/27/05, TSa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
: Yes, and dispatch as a runtime keyed access into a code multitude.
: The covariant part of the method's sig! The code equivalent to keyed
: data access into hashes.
Um, yeah. Won't play in Peoria, though.
Where
HaloO,
Juerd wrote:
This aside, you could of course just double the colon. Or use a
semicolon.
Semicolon would give me the mnemonic of 'end of statement' seperating
the dispatched part from the checked part of the signature. Or it
reminds one of the array and hash slicing. Should we call
What I want to do, is a bit like...
class A {
has $.b;
method show { $.b.say };
};
A( b = 5 ).show;`
Thanks,
Xinming
On 10/27/05, Yiyi Hu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I want to do, is a bit like...
class A {
has $.b;
method show { $.b.say };
};
A( b = 5 ).show;`
Yes, I definitely want this to be the way that case type instances are
created: all those .news everywhere could get annoying.
Anyway,
Yiyi Hu skribis 2005-10-28 3:17 (+0800):
class A {
has $.b;
method show { $.b.say };
};
A( b = 5 ).show;`
This is how some other language construct objects, but not how Perl does
it. In other words: you should not want this.
Perhaps it is possible to have a class export a sub to its user.
Juerd~
On 10/27/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yiyi Hu skribis 2005-10-28 3:17 (+0800):
class A {
has $.b;
method show { $.b.say };
};
A( b = 5 ).show;`
This is how some other language construct objects, but not how Perl does
it. In other words: you should not want this.
How
Matt Fowles skribis 2005-10-27 15:52 (-0400):
This is how some other language construct objects, but not how Perl does
it. In other words: you should not want this.
How does that logically follow?
They are two ways of expressing what I think. If they said exactly the
same thing, I wouldn't
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 01:30:44PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: On 10/27/05, Yiyi Hu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: What I want to do, is a bit like...
:
: class A {
: has $.b;
: method show { $.b.say };
: };
:
: A( b = 5 ).show;`
:
: Yes, I definitely want this to be the way that case type
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 05:37:13AM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Will I be able to do something like:
:
: package Foo;
Hmm, you just started in Perl 5 mode.
: $*VERSION = 1.3.2;
Perl 5 would get confused here, so I'm presuming Perl 6. But Perl 6
isn't likely to let you override the global
On 10/27/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 05:37:13AM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Will I be able to do something like:
:
: package Foo;
Hmm, you just started in Perl 5 mode.
: $*VERSION = 1.3.2;
Perl 5 would get confused here, so I'm presuming Perl 6. But
Hello all,
I have a question about method conflict resolution works for roles,
and I cannot seem to find this in any of the Apoc/Syn documents.
Here is the basic issue:
role Foo {
method foo { ... }
method bar { ... } # we will use this later :)
}
role Bar {
method foo { ... }
14 matches
Mail list logo
