On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 02:01:08PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
> Long-term, we need to minimize the differences between low-level PMCs
> and Parrot objects defined in PIR code. That may mean allowing optional
> arguments and named parameter passing. But, I want to keep the PDDs
> focused on dri
Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Looking over the recent editorial improvements in pdd21, I need to point out
that, right now, if a method is written in C, it can't have optional
arguments. (This is per Leo; I haven't checked into how/why this
restriction arose.)
Aye. This went through my mind as I made
Looking over the recent editorial improvements in pdd21, I need to point out
that, right now, if a method is written in C, it can't have optional
arguments. (This is per Leo; I haven't checked into how/why this
restriction arose.)
Thus, to support both of these interfaces:
=item get_namespace
