Re: Properties and stricture

[John Porter]

Michael G Schwern wrote:
> If there's a class which isn't strictly defined anywhere in
> your hierarchy, no go.

For robust, mission-critical software, that can hardly
be called a negative.


> Of course, it probably only works with strict functional languages,
> which is very unPerlish.

It could work in perl when perl is being used in an FP manner;
that would indeed be very Perlish.


-- 
John Porter

"Anything essential is invisible to the eyes."