On Sunday, December 14, 2003, at 06:14 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
But the agreement could be implied by silence. If, by the time the
entire program is parsed, nobody has said they want to extend an
interface, then the interface can be considered closed. In other
words, if you think you *might* want to
Larry Wall wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : Let's see if I've got this straight:
> :
> : role methods supercede inherited methods;
>
> But can defer via SUPER::
>
> : class methods supercede role methods;
>
> But can defer via ROLE:: or some such.
Check, and check. Of course, SUPER:: works w
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:14:42PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 03:16:16AM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> [ my ramblings about a mechanism for role methods to supercede class
> methods elided ]
>
> I think there's a simple way to solve this: If you're changing the
> pol
According to Larry Wall:
> Actually, I think making people declare what they want to extend
> might actually provide a nice little safety mechanism for what can
> be modified by the eval and what can't.
Well, I don't know about such 'safety' ... seems like a bone in a pond
to me ... but as a means
