On 23 Jul 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
Instead of having a bunch of specialized ops made for... For example, should socket operations be
constructing/working on specific pmcs, have, say, four general-purpose
ops whose meaning could be given by each pmc that uses them.
ops, or methods on a core Socket PMC? I think the latter, but only
because sockets don't seem as "core" as addition, not for any
principled reason.
Juergen Boemmels already has provided a patch, that allows calling methods on IO objects. Though there was no discussion on that and its not applied.
Another example: why does interpinfo exist,
interpinfo is already obsoleted by my additions to ParrotInterpreter.
Do others (Dan? Juergen? Leo?) have some stronger sense of what should and shouldn't be an op?
Common operations and all time critical stuff should be ops. Special functionality (like interpinfo) or IO is IMHO better done as methods.
/s
leo
