Re: type-checking [Was: What is Perl?]

[Dan Sugalski]

At 11:08 PM 8/1/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >>>>> "PS" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>PS> Perhaps the best of both worlds would be design-by-contract?  A la Conway?
>
>Conway? Who's Conway?

Dunno. He had some sort of thing a few weeks ago. The Public Conway 4.0 or 
something, I think it was. :)

>Anyway, the design by contract might be interesting...
>
>(I wonder if internals should require it. (Dan are you listening.))

((Nope. Currently getting the kids off to bed. :))

>And how would it look at the perl level...

I think I'm missing the point. Why pull 'em out like that? Why not just put 
the code in the body of the sub? Though a good post condition would benefit 
from some sort of unconditional catch of return, I suppose. Perhaps 
allowing continue on the outer sub block...

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk