On Sat Sep 26 09:23:06 2009, moritz wrote: > On Mon Sep 21 12:07:15 2009, pmichaud wrote: > > I agree that the existing behavior is wrong, but what > > should happen here? Should it report a type mismatch on > > the invocant when invoking A::foo, or should it complain > > that A::foo isn't a valid method for a B object? > > I'd say the latter, because "type mismatch on the invocant" might be > mightily confusing. > Agree, done while putting back .A::foo style syntax, and un-todo'd the now passing test for this.
Thanks, Jonathan
