> > MI thing, but now it's sounding like a constructor bubbling scheme, like
in
> > C++, etc.
>
> Right. Perl doesn't have it by default, and *can't* have it
> except under certain rather strict constraints, e.g. when all
> players are playing by the Class::Struct rules, or some other
> more elab
> What I was suggesting was to consider broadening what the
> $foo : bar style postfix sub syntax allows/assists bar to do,
> so that bars can be used to set properties OR do other stuff.
>
What's the practical utility of this? This discussion has been pretty
abstract so far... It's easy to see ho
Matt Youell wrote:
> Forgive my woeful ignorance Could someone define "data aggregation by
> inheritance"? From John's original mention I thought this was some oblique
> MI thing, but now it's sounding like a constructor bubbling scheme, like in
> C++, etc.
Right. Perl doesn't have it by def
Hi Uri,
I think most (all???) of what is needed can be found at:
http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE.html
I know it's C++, but this framework is well designed - and it is portable
:-) (in other words: it has been ported to an impressive number of
platforms). The features (read patterns) that can
> Me:
[$foo is bar] can change the value of $foo.
> Damian:
Yes. For example:
my $foo is persistent;
Could you explain this further please?
> Me:
$foo : bar baz is roughly equivalent to baz(bar($foo))
> Damian:
Err. No. That would be:
A few questions regarding typing. (first some assumptions/axioms)
Axiom #1: perl6 will enable programs to be more explicit about the typing
of variables -- even allowing them to specify dynamic-ish properties about
the values in those variables.
Damian's Attribute::Types has examples like this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 10:26:39AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Hmm... let me write it first would you? Shouldn't be *too* hard.
> > Suggestions for a real name for it?
>
> Class::Anonymous? Class::Anon?
>
> PS base has to take an array ref. Don't forget MI!
I
