On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 06:17:14AM -0000, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 05:17:56 +0300, Yuval Kogman > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > > > I gave Perl 6 to Mr. Clean, and he said that if type inferrence was > > formalized, and used always, except that it's usually used for > > performance, and with a lexical pragma can be used to enforce types. > > I like facist programming when it can help me, so I would like to > > see something like his proposal. > > > > no autocoerce;; > > my $y =3D 'blah'; > > my Int $x =3D $y; # compile time type error > > > > This scheme is not perfect.. Maybe someone has an idea? > > I would prefur this to be written. > > use strict "types"; >
I suspect there will be many ways to do types stricture/inference in Perl6. I expect that type modules will influence PIL generation so that people will have to choose the structures they want at a given place: use Types::some-type-sheme or even use Types::Functional::some-sub-type-sheme If such a typing mode gives us an haskell with some Perl6 concrete syntax we eventually could port the whole Haskell environment as Perl6. docs/notes/recursive_polymorphism_and_type_inference is a start in that direction. The best we can hope is that PIL generarion will eventually be written in Perl6. I hope Perl6 will eventually become more expressive than Haskell for handling type problems. So Perl6 could become the playground of type theory searchers. I have a dream... At any given place, be able to choose between the power of functional programming or the convenience of imperative programming. both while keeping Perl6 nice syntax. -- cognominal stef
