On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 12:49:41PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > If there's a class which isn't strictly defined anywhere in
> > your hierarchy, no go.
>
> For robust, mission-critical software, that can hardly
> be called a negative.
Not a negative, but realize that many people find it of less value
than the annoyances it brings with it (myself included) for many
tasks. The upshot of this is alot of CPAN code will not be strictly
typed, which will cause problems if you want to build anything based
on such code.
> > Of course, it probably only works with strict functional languages,
> > which is very unPerlish.
>
> It could work in perl when perl is being used in an FP manner;
> that would indeed be very Perlish.
Yes! That would be a magic trick I'd love to see.
--
Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One
no paste enema
lycos is taught about it
my ass is sealed
-- Schwern
