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

[Piers Cawley]

Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (I think -- Piers) writes: 
>    > 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...
> 
> Argh, no! A good postcondition is either invisible to the client
> code, or makes its presence felt only through the effect of turning
> a bad final state (or return value) into an exception. It does *not*
> offer a last chance to monkey with the return value!

Yeah, if you want to do that sort of thing you need to mess with
'advising' your methods, a la emacs-lisp def-advice. But we can do
that already. 

-- 
Piers