Rod Adams wrote:
It used to be
&foo
&foo
And has become
&foo:(Array,Int)
&foo:(Hash,Int)
The return type arrow --> inside the :() type spec is not
yet approved by @Larry.
In my mind, the more interesting question is what does &foo without the
<> specifiers return when foo is mul
Rod Adams wrote:
> It used to be
>
>&foo
>&foo
>
> but I seem to recall that there was a mild change that occurred. Or
> maybe I'm thinking about the adding of the colon for operators. I'm not
> certain, but it's something very close to the above.
Well, it doesn't seem ambiguous to me. Oper
dakkar wrote:
Say I have:
multi sub foo(Array $a,Int $b) {...}
multi sub foo(Hash %a, Int $b) {...}
and I want to (distinctly) wrap each multisub, say for testing, or AOP,
or whatever. How do I get the two different code references? As far as i
can gather from the Apocalipses and Synopses, the
With a meta model for code signatures you could generate a code
signature and then ask it to locate any matching multis.
For a more concrete handle on how this might look if I were king-
wait a while... ;-)
When I have more time to finalize docs/mmd.kwid and then describe
the meta model for func
Say I have:
multi sub foo(Array $a,Int $b) {...}
multi sub foo(Hash %a, Int $b) {...}
and I want to (distinctly) wrap each multisub, say for testing, or AOP,
or whatever. How do I get the two different code references? As far as i
can gather from the Apocalipses and Synopses, there should be a
