On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 11:07:51AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> Sure, except that you're not really inheriting from a role here.
> You're really inheriting from an anonymous class of the same name. :-)
Hmm, "Anonymous class with the name 'Array of Any'" sounds like
an oxymoron. Also consider:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 01:49:02AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: Aye. But if a Role can be inherited _from_, then this should
: work too, right?
:
: role Point {
: has $.x; has $.y;
: method move_right { $.x++ }
: };
: role OurPoint is Point {
: method move_right { .
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 10:43:45AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> : So the last line means a role can be used just like a class, and
> : _inherit_ its behaviour as well?
> :
> : role Point { has $.x; has $.y; method move_right { $.x++ } };
> : role MyPoint is Point {
> : method move_right
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 01:33:56AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 08:19:38AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > I think the distinction is still useful to document that there are
: > still unbound types. What we need to emphasize is that a role can be
: > used as a class, at which
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 08:19:38AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> I think the distinction is still useful to document that there are
> still unbound types. What we need to emphasize is that a role can be
> used as a class, at which point any unbound types are bound to Any,
> or whatever we're calling
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 08:28:33PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: S06 made many explicit uses of generics as classes, which I find
: difficult to reconcile with the "only roles takes type parameter"
: ruling. For example:
:
: my Hash of Array of Recipe %book;
: my Hash[returns=>Array[retur
