Me wrote:
>
> Question 1:
>
> Afaict, even with use strict at its most strict, perl 6
> can't (in practice) complain, at compile time, if
>
> $foo.Foun
>
> refers to an undeclared Foun.
>
> Right?
it is already detectable. from perldoc perlref:
Perl will raise an exception if you try to access
nonexistent fields. To avoid inconsistencies, always use
the fields::phash() function provided by the "fields"
pragma.
Although other discussion in the thread indicates that we may
be confusing properties and member fields.
as I understand it, .foo has been proposed to replace ->{foo} and
we're talking about fields, not properties.
Property access has got to be something else. Last year's code pitched
to the perl6-data list generally used a colon for that; use of "is" as the
property assignment operator invites and suggests
$foun_status_of_foo = (is $foo foun);
to access the status of the foun property of foo, should such exist and be
defined
et cetera. Maybe there will be a distinction between notexist and notdef.
I know the
SQL people want an explicit "unknown" value.
And we're in blue sky territory for the stricture.
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187
Keep Dan Sugalski away from my stuffed animals
