Am Montag, den 19.10.2009, 16:43 -0700 schrieb Jon Lang:
> Raphael Descamps wrote:
> > I personally don't understand why we don't have a exclude and alias
> > operator in Perl 6 but I have not read all the synopses and don't have
> > an overview.
>
> I don't think that it's explicitly spelled out
Raphael Descamps wrote:
> In the original traits paper the aliasing is not "deep": to respect the
> flattening property, the semantic of the role must not change, so
> aliasing a recursive method will call the original method. It's a known
> theoretical weakness of the traits paper and "freezing ro
Raphael Descamps wrote:
> I personally don't understand why we don't have a exclude and alias
> operator in Perl 6 but I have not read all the synopses and don't have
> an overview.
I don't think that it's explicitly spelled out anywhere; but the
reason is fairly straightforward: exclude and alias
On 2009-Oct-18, at 3:44 pm, Jon Lang wrote:
David Green wrote:
I would expect that role Logging { method log(Numeric $x:) {...} }
means the invocant is really of type Numeric & Logging, without
Logging having to do Numeric. On the other hand, I can see that
strictly that might not make se
Am Freitag, den 16.10.2009, 10:54 +0400 schrieb Richard Hainsworth:
> Arising out of "Freezing Roles" is a related question.
>
> Suppose I download a module from CPAN with a role I want to use, but it
> introduces a method that I want that is in conflict with an existing
> method (say one taken
David Green wrote:
> Jon Lang wrote:
>>
>> This implies that both Logging and Math do Numeric, since the invocant
>> ought to be of a type that the class does.
>
> I would expect that
> role Logging { method log(Numeric $x:) {...} }
> means the invocant is really of type Numeric & Logging, witho
On 2009-Oct-17, at 1:55 am, Jon Lang wrote:
This implies that both Logging and Math do Numeric, since the
invocant ought to be of a type that the class does.
I would expect that
role Logging { method log(Numeric $x:) {...} }
means the invocant is really of type Numeric & Logging, without
David Green wrote:
> Aha, so the bark:(Dog:) syntax identifies the method by its signature as
> well, thus distinguishing it from the .bark:(Tree:) method. This works fine
> when the sigs can distinguish the invocants, which is very common. However,
> I could have ambiguous methods even including
On 2009-Oct-16, at 12:54 am, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
Is there syntactic sugar for aliasing the conflicting method? Eg.
something like
does XML :db-write;
There needs to be something more than sugar: making a new class or
role with different methods will break substitutability. However, w
Arising out of "Freezing Roles" is a related question.
Suppose I download a module from CPAN with a role I want to use, but it
introduces a method that I want that is in conflict with an existing
method (say one taken from another CPAN module).
How should the method be aliased to prevent it f
10 matches
Mail list logo
