Re: What does 'eqv' do exactly?

On 2008-May-3, at 5:12 pm, John M. Dlugosz wrote: Jon Lang dataweaver-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: My own understanding of it is that "snapshot semantics" involves looking at an immutable copy of an object (a "snapshot" of it) instead of looking at the object itself. That said, my understa

Re: What does 'eqv' do exactly?

Jon Lang dataweaver-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: I suspect that at the core of John's question is the fact that nobody has ever actually said what 'snapshot semantics' is: it's a term that's been tossed around with the assumption that people already know its meaning. My own understanding of it i

Re: What does 'eqv' do exactly?

Adriano Ferreira a.r.ferreira-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 4:00 PM, John M. Dlugosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've searched the archives, but did not see a good explanation of what eqv does, and what is meant by snapshotting in the description of the synopses. Can a

nested 'our' subs - senseless?

What does this mean? our sub outer () { ... our sub inner () { ... } } inner; # defined? I think this should be illegal. Nested named subs makes sense for 'my', with the rules of visibility matching the ability to clone the closure. But putting the nested sub into package scope

Re: What does 'eqv' do exactly?

I suspect that at the core of John's question is the fact that nobody has ever actually said what 'snapshot semantics' is: it's a term that's been tossed around with the assumption that people already know its meaning. My own understanding of it is that "snapshot semantics" involves looking at an

Re: What does 'eqv' do exactly?

On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 4:00 PM, John M. Dlugosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've searched the archives, but did not see a good explanation of what eqv > does, and what is meant by snapshotting in the description of the synopses. > > Can anyone explain it (with examples?) or point to an existing

Re: What does 'eqv' do exactly?

John M. Dlugosz wrote: > I've searched the archives, but did not see a good explanation of what eqv > does, > and what is meant by snapshotting in the description of the synopses. Try this: http://markmail.org/message/vub5hceisf6cuemk > Can anyone explain it (with examples?) or point to an exis

Re: "All classes imply the existence of a role of the same name."

On 2008 May 3, at 6:25, Richard Hainsworth wrote: - if u want to add a role to an existing object, perl wraps the object into a class, adds the role, reinstantiates the object. As I understand it, Perl inserts a new anonymous class as the object's parent, and adds the role to that. The ob

What does 'eqv' do exactly?

I've searched the archives, but did not see a good explanation of what eqv does, and what is meant by snapshotting in the description of the synopses. Can anyone explain it (with examples?) or point to an existing treatment, please? --John

grammar for 'constant' ?

The synopses are contradictary over the way 'constant' works. First it says that it is a declarator like 'my'. Then in S12 it shows my constant ... and our constant ... that is, independant from the my or our declarator. Assuming the second way is newer/better, what is the grammar for t

Class question: what is (my $!var) ?

I've come back to this: my $!var — class attribute, no accessor, not inheritable. How is this different from a normal lexical variable? Role composition can show differences? What's the point? our $!var — class attribute, no accessor, inheritable. But private variables are not inherited.

Re: "All classes imply the existence of a role of the same name."

All classes imply the existence of a role of the same name. -- c Please justify that. --John As a 'Joe Blow' type programmer trying to follow this thread, I went back to the "traits" paper and read John's Polymorphism paper.