> I believe Dan said that he wanted to make objects a lot faster in P6. I
> don't think we should be precluded from requesting Things That Make Sense
> (tm) just because the current implementation is sub-optimal in performance
> if nothing inherently prevents a better implementation.
I don't think we should assume that we can't scratch our nose without
getting overly object-happy. For the particular aspect I'm driving at
there is no *need* for objects of any kind, no catch, no throw, no
structured exceptions: I want the program simply to _die_. I'm not
against someone else providing higher level ways handle/trap/propagate
those croakings, be the way procedural or OO or what is the rave du
jour. Don't get me wrong: for some purposes and somtimes I like
structured warnings. But what I am proposing is very low-level, it's
below the level of Perl the language, actually. Think of it as a
cleaned-up consistent wrapping of the current C library APIs. If
somebody wants to further wrap these failures into something nicer,
okay, I have no problem with that.
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
