On Oct 17, 2005, at 12:32 PM, TSa wrote:
This also means that they would not (directly) be inheritable
since inheritence moves along superclass lines, and not with
@ISA. I am also not sure what you mean about multi-methods
either, could you please explain more?
Symmetric MMD at least has the meaning that the above mentioned
asymmetry
doesn't exist for infix ops on the syntactic level:
$x foo $y;
which neither means
($x foo) $y; # calculated prefix op from postfix foo
nor
$x (foo $y); # calculated postfix op from prefix foo.
I can't speak for metric MMD, though. But IIRC, the metric is
'sum of superclass hops'.
--
Okay, I think I understand now. So if all class methods were multis,
then we would not need inheritance. The MMD would use the (super|sub)
class relationships, and be able to call (super|sub)classes
automagically.
However, IIRC, the "everything is a multi-method" proposal was not
accepted. Could this then be just a restricted case of multi-methods?
So all class methods would just use MMD dispatch rules on the
invocant parameter, therefore allowing an implicit pseudo-inheritence
to take place?
Larry, is this what you were thinking?
Stevan
