On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 11:03:33AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Brent asked:
> > I assume we're going to recycle 'my' and 'our' to be 'instance' and
> > 'class'--is that correct?
>
> That's what I'm proposing.
This seems wise. Very Perlish.
> If it's an outer-scope lexical, use C<caller->{MY}>
Ok, I'm all over the nice new features of Perl6, but darnit,
"upvar" is one of the primary reasons that TCL is unusable. Please,
let's not soften the walls of lexical scope. They're there for a
reason.
If I ever read documentation to the effect:
=head2 CALLBACKS
All callbacks have access to the state of the event
handler through the lexical variables $state and
%state_data in the caller's namespace.
I will defenestrate the offending programmer. Is there any GOOD reason
to want this? Will we ever WANT to write:
class Foo {
my $bar;
sub fu {
my $bar;
}
}
Is that something to encourage? Is accessing a method caller's namepsace
desirable? That seems as bad as the caller accessing the member
variables.
--
Aaron Sherman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for GPG info. Fingerprint:
www.ajs.com/~ajs 6DC1 F67A B9FB 2FBA D04C 619E FC35 5713 2676 CEAF
"Write your letters in the sand for the day I'll take your hand
In the land that our grandchildren knew." -Queen/_'39_
