On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 04:00:53PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > %num_of_lines<file> = [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > : because the Perl 5 way would put a reference to @file in the hash. > : Scalar context always makes references now, from what I understand. > > Interestingly, a stored reference would track the current number of > lines rather than taking a snapshot. But you should definitely think > of it as storing a reference rather than the number of lines, because > the ref will certainly behave differently in string context. > > Larry
How sane would it be to put a reference to the instance method in the
hash? I think Perl 6 doesn't actually support that directly, but one can
always do:
%num_of_lines<file> = List::elems.assuming(@file);
I'm not sure if the currying works correctly there. How does one curry
the invocant? (I'm thinking about a situation when the method doesn't
specify the invocant explicitly in the signature, if that makes any
difference.)
I like the whole idea of bound references (to use the Pythonic term),
although Python's syntax lends itself better to such use. Sometimes I
wish we would require parentheses on every method and sub call. Then a
reference to the method/sub would be simply its name without the parens.
I hope I never have to design my own language. I would be schizophrenic
before the day ends.
--
wolverian
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
