On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 6:01 PM, David Herman <dher...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Are you suggesting a) that struct types should always be value types, or b) > some sort of extension to the binary data spec that allows the creation of > immutable structs that are value types? > > I'm afraid a) just seems unworkable -- compound binary data needs to be > mutable, and its sub-components really need to be selectable by reference, > not by copying. If you meant b) (or something else), can you flesh it out a > bit more?
Another possibility is that the current proposal labeled "value-types" doesn't mention immutability :-) My read of the so-called value-types proposal is that some (as of yet undefined) mechanism which will cause some set of non-primitive objects to override the default "call toString() and concatenate the results" behavior for the plus operator. That override would likely be some form of double-dispatch. That being said, if the immutability is a pre-requisite for "value-types" (presumably in order to address the triple equals hard case), and given that value-types was tossed out there as a potential solution to the bignum requirement, can somebody sketch out how === would work for bignums? My intuition is that any triple-equals solution that works for bignums would also work for decimal. > Dave - Sam Ruby _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
