Garrett Goebel wrote:
>
> Any word from on high whether subroutine signatures will apply to methods in
> Perl6? There's RFC128 and RFC97... but they both mostly dodge the issue of
> methods.
>
> The absense of method signatures for specifying required, optional, and
> named parameters... not to mention type-checking for validation and dispatch
> are why we've ended up with an assortment of parameter handling modules with
> conflicting styles.
It was my intention that it was implicit in rfc97 that method call syntax
would
be rewritten before the application of the polymorphism rules. I did not
include a method-call syntax example in the summary, since I thought it
orthogonal
to the issue of polymorphism by argument types.
Perl5 method syntax and "indirect object" syntax both are alternate ways of
specifying the absolutely named method based on the type of the object,
which
appears as the first argument. Rfc97 would come into play based on the
types of the
second and later arguments, as well as possibly backporting the existing
dispatch mechanism to work with as well as without parentheses.
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187
"... raised indoors and tested by certified technicians"
