On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 09:48:56PM +0200, Jonathan Worthington wrote: > chromatic wrote: > >On Monday 27 September 2010 at 12:03, Jonathan Worthington wrote: > >>However, at this point I'd be very surprised if we're still > >>using (in Rakudo) the Integer/Float PMCs for our Int/Num types > >>after the meta-model replacement lands. > > > >What do Parrot's Int and Float PMCs need to be useful to Rakudo? > > Sorry, I shoulda been a bit more explicit on the reasoning. The > issue isn't that they're not good enough, or that they need to > change. Rather, it's that as the meta-model design has started to > come together, I've mostly concluded they don't really fit in. > [...]
...which makes me wonder whether the existing Integer and Float PMCs would fit in well for other languages that also need to have them derive from a generic Object class. Yes, Rakudo is moving to where it will not be using Integer/Float PMCs, but what about other languages on Parrot? Would most of these languages expect that integer/float values exist "outside" of the standard object hierarchy (as they do in Parrot), or would we expect them to also make the same sorts of choices that Rakudo is making because the base types "don't really fit in"? Just wondering... Pm _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
