On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:17:20PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > ==
> > Either way I'm not sure it solves the problem; if each module asserts
> > that *they* are the smarter one then you either wind up with the same
> > situation you
> ==
> Either way I'm not sure it solves the problem; if each module asserts
> that *they* are the smarter one then you either wind up with the same
> situation you have now or even worse contention.
>
==
What if both modules have this :override bit set at the same time?
Does the second one still win? Or does the first one win again?
==
It is wise to live the behaviour
> This RFC proposes a support of a situation when a more-knowledgable module may
> steal overloading from a less-knowledgable module or visa versa;
What if both modules have this :override bit set at the same time? Does
the second one still win? Or does the first one win again?
Either way I'm no
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Data: overloading via the SECOND operand if needed
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Ilya Zakharevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 September 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 234
Version: 1
