At 04:18 PM 7/2/2001 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 12:59:51PM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
> > Its not quite the same thing, but Java does have the concept of
> > anonymous classes (it names them 'inner' classes): Is Perl6 going
> > to have a similar concept?
>
>Are they really necessary? You can get the same effect so many other
>ways in Perl already, inner classes seem to be a way around alot of
>Java's BSDM features, like interfaces.
The example I was thinking about for this was what we're going to be doing
for perl scalars. (Poor use of the terminology on my part is probably
responsible for a good chunk of the heat in this)
With scalars, we're going to have a bunch of special-purpose functions
instead of one general-purpose function and a bunch of flags. (Avoids lots
of conditional tests--conditionals are bad, they kill pipelines and shoot
performance) I was thinking of something similar for objects. Instead of a
bunch of properties and one general-purpose method, you use the right set
of methods (by twiddling ISA, though it probably ought to be called DOESA
or ACTSLIKEA for this) and don't check the properties.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
