TSa wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
> If you're not using "multi", then the signature is superfluous for
> type-checking purposes.
I think that signatures do matter for type-checking! It is
an error to provide too few or to many positional args or
args with an incompatible type.
Mea culpa. I thought you were still talking about using an object's
methods as part of the process of deciding whether or not that object
satisfies the role requirements of some other routine's signature. Of
course signatures matter when it comes to deciding which arguments
that method will accept.
--
Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
