# New Ticket Created by Geoffrey Broadwell # Please include the string: [perl #125606] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # <URL: https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=125606 >
Since Roles compose their private methods into a Class (and thus Roles can see each other's private methods), a Role ought to be able to require that some other Role (or the Class) supply a particular private method, just as they can for public methods. See http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2015-07-11#i_10881271 : 19:12 japhb m: role A { method !foo { say "success!" } }; role B { method !foo { ... }; method bar { self!foo } }; class C does A does B { }; C.new.bar(); 19:12 camelia rakudo-moar 58a5ed: OUTPUT«===SORRY!===Private method 'foo' must be resolved by class C because it exists in multiple roles (B, A)» 19:12 japhb Is there any reason that one of the two above can't be made to work? 19:12 (Personally I think the last one should DWIM.) 19:13 masak japhb: I guess it comes down to how private methods from a role compose into a class. And then http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2015-07-13#i_10886690 : 12:17 yoleaux 11 Jul 2015 21:02Z <japhb> jnthn: What are your thoughts on http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2015-07-11#i_10881267 and http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2015-07-11#i_10881334 ? Having no good resolution kinda gets in the way of a nice refactoring (for now, I'm copying the required private methods into each role that would want to consume them, and then changing the names to not collide between the roles which is ... blech.) [...] 12:19 jnthn .tell japhb I think the one at http://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2015-07-11#i_10881271 should indeed DWYM; feel free to file a ticket on that
