Re: foo(1: 2: 3: 4:) ?

[Autrijus Tang]

On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 11:07:59AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
> >Hmm, I'm doubting that reflecting how many invocants you have on the
> >caller side is a good idea.  It seems awfully brittle in the face of
> >reimplementation.
> 
> Yep. And that's precisely why we previously ruled against colons in the 
> call syntax (apart from single-dispatch indirect object syntax, of course).

Err, wait.  From S06:

    # Indirect multimethod call...
    handle_event $w, $e: $m;

Is this single-dispatch?  If yes, what does "single-dispatch" really mean?  :)

Thanks,
/Autrijus/

pgpHKAhaHImdB.pgp
Description: PGP signature