Jonathan Worthington wrote:
OK, so I've added a REQUIREMENTS section to the objects PDD now and
filled it out with some (hopefully most) of what Perl 6 and .Net need as
a start.
Thanks Jonathan, it's a great start!
Allison
Allison Randal wrote:
More specifically: If you have any questions related to a PDD in clip,
please add them to a QUESTIONS section at the end of the PDD. For
requirements, use REQUIREMENTS. Neither of these sections will live in
the final version of the PDD, so it's a flag for me to process th
To wrap up (or restart) the thread, here are some thoughts from a
high-level view:
HLL classnames should live in the symbol table (i.e. namespace), not in
Parrot's internal class registry. Yes, this means PIR/POST will need
different syntax for instantiating objects from HLL classes. But the
chromatic wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 09:49, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Would it be a good idea to start collecting requirements together from
different language implementors so that when the time comes to work on
the OO PDD, there is already a good description of what it needs to do?
P
Am Montag, 23. Oktober 2006 15:14 schrieb Patrick R. Michaud:
> > .HLL 'pge', ''
> > ...
> > cl = newclass 'Exp' # ['pge'; 'Exp']
> > ...
> > .namespace ['Exp'] # ['pge'; 'Exp']
> > ...
> > scl = subclass 'Exp', ['Exp'; 'Closure'] # ['pge'; 'Exp'; 'Closure']
> > ...
>
> It
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 05:49:08PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Allison Randal wrote:
> >>I think the object model needs a thorough going over in general
> >Yup. It's on the list right after I/O, threads, and events.
> >...
> >Ruby is a serious OO language, but it's not finished yet. For t
On Monday 23 October 2006 09:49, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Would it be a good idea to start collecting requirements together from
> different language implementors so that when the time comes to work on
> the OO PDD, there is already a good description of what it needs to do?
> If so, I'm happ
Allison Randal wrote:
I think the object model needs a thorough going over in general
Yup. It's on the list right after I/O, threads, and events.
-- for
the reasons above and because it's an unproven system. I'm not
convinced that it will handle all of Perl 6's needs as is. No serious
OO langu
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 11:38:10PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 22. Oktober 2006 20:56 schrieb Patrick R. Michaud:
>
> > I strongly disagree. I don't think that a subclass should have to
> > be named as a sub-namespace of its parent class.
>
> Namespace and classes are currently t
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 07:10:21PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 19. Oktober 2006 23:19 schrieb Patrick R. Michaud:
> > .HLL 'pge', ''
> >
> > .sub __onload :load
> > $P0 = newclass 'Exp'
> [...]
> > $P0 = subclass 'Exp', 'Closure'
> > # ...
> >
Am Sonntag, 22. Oktober 2006 20:56 schrieb Patrick R. Michaud:
> I strongly disagree. I don't think that a subclass should have to
> be named as a sub-namespace of its parent class.
Namespace and classes are currently totally orthogonal. You are declaring a
subclass (not a sub-namespace) with a
Am Donnerstag, 19. Oktober 2006 23:19 schrieb Patrick R. Michaud:
> So, here's the revised version of the code to create
> the classes:
>
> .HLL 'pge', ''
>
> .sub __onload :load
> $P0 = newclass 'Exp'
[...]
> $P0 = subclass 'Exp', 'Closure'
> # ...
> .end
>
>
Matt Diephouse writes:
Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:01:29PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
>> > This is unspecced. ATM, all classes go into the 'parrot' HLL. This
is
>> > a relic of
Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:01:29PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
>> > This is unspecced. ATM, all classes go into the 'parrot' HLL. This is
>> > a relic of the past and I think it ne
Matt Diephouse wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:01:29PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> This is unspecced. ATM, all classes go into the 'parrot' HLL. This is
> a relic of the past and I think it needs to change. I'm pretty sure
> that HLL classes w
Matt Diephouse wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
According to pdd21, each HLL gets its own hll_namespace.
PGE is really a form of HLL compiler, so it should have
its own hll_namespace, instead of using parrot's hll namespace:
.HLL 'pge', ''
I don't know that that's nec
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 11:20:56PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:01:29PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> >> ATM, all classes go into the 'parrot' HLL. [...] I'm pretty sure
> >> that HLL classes will have to go into the H
Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:01:29PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> This is unspecced. ATM, all classes go into the 'parrot' HLL. This is
> a relic of the past and I think it needs to change. I'm pretty sure
> that HLL classes will have to go into the
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 10:01:29PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > According to pdd21, each HLL gets its own hll_namespace.
> >PGE is really a form of HLL compiler, so it should have
> >its own hll_namespace, instead of using parrot's hll namespace:
Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
According to pdd21, each HLL gets its own hll_namespace.
PGE is really a form of HLL compiler, so it should have
its own hll_namespace, instead of using parrot's hll namespace:
.HLL 'pge', ''
I don't know that that's necessarily the case, but
First, my apologies to Chip for this message -- I know he's
probably already answered this question for me a couple of
times but I've either forgotten, I'm too dense, or I just
can't find the answers now that I need them. So, with
appropriate contrition for asking yet again...
After the changes i
21 matches
Mail list logo
