Paul Hodges wrote:
> Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Incidently, I think I've caught on to _one_ of the concepts in the
> > upcoming object-orientation proposal: linguistically, there's a triad
> > of "basic verbs" - namely "be", "do", and "have". If I'm following
> > things properly,
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 18:15, Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Based on the source material pointed to as your inspiration for roles, I'm
> a little confused as to how roles and classes could be unified. From what
> I read in the source material, a key point of a role (well, they weren't
> actually calling
--- Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Incidently, I think I've caught on to _one_ of the concepts in the
> upcoming object-orientation proposal: linguistically, there's a triad
> of "basic verbs" - namely "be", "do", and "have". If I'm following
> things properly, one could think of an o
I'm invoking the principle that the only stupid question is the one not
asked:
Larry Wall wrote:
> if indeed properties can be unified with roles (and roles with
> classes).
Based on the source material pointed to as your inspiration for roles, I'm
a little confused as to how roles and classe
