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
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 04:18:19PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: > Anyway, this all implies that use of a role as a method name defaults to
: > returning whether the type in question matches the subtype. That is,
: > when you say
: >
: > $foo.true
: >
: > it's asking wheth
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or are you worried that these have to be declared at all? I think
> we need to declare them or we can't use them as bare identifiers.
> There are no barewords in Perl 6, so they have to be something
> predeclared, or otherwise syntact
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 04:18:19PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: > Anyway, this all implies that use of a role as a method name defaults to
: > returning whether the type in question matches the subtype. That is,
: > when you say
: >
: > $foo.true
: >
: > it's asking wheth
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 02:01:17PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: So C would be for casting, not coercion, right?
:
: Suppose you have a class Foo, such that:
:
: class Foo does (Bar, Baz) {
: ...
: }
:
: ... or however that looks. May I then presume that
:
: $foo.Bar.zap
Larry Wall writes:
> Anyway, this all implies that use of a role as a method name defaults to
> returning whether the type in question matches the subtype. That is,
> when you say
>
> $foo.true
>
> it's asking whether the Boolean property fulfills the true constraint.
> When you say
>
>
On Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 10:04 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
Explicitly:
$bar.does(Color)# does $bar know how to be a Color?
$bar.as(Color) # always cast to Color
Implicitly boolean:
$bar ~~ Color # $bar.does(Color)
?$bar.Color # $bar.does(Color)
if $b
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 02:48:06PM +0100, Stéphane Payrard wrote:
: Hi,
:
: I don't remember anything about enums and bitenums in the
: apocalypses. This is probably not very difficult to roll out
: something using macros but I feel that should belong to the
: standard language.
[Warning: specula
Hi,
I don't remember anything about enums and bitenums in the
apocalypses. This is probably not very difficult to roll out
something using macros but I feel that should belong to the
standard language.
--
stef
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:44:15PM -0500, Joe Gottman wrote:
>In Perl 6, how will it be possible to iterate through two arrays at the
> same time? According to Apocalypse 4, the syntax is
> for @a; @b -> $a; $b {
>
> According to the book "Perl 6 Essentials" the syntax is
> for zip(
13 matches
Mail list logo
