On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 14:25, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > (2) The behavior of an explicit bool type, _if_ one exists, that stores > "truth", not "value". Such that C<my bool $y = (0 but true)> stores > true, not 0, and does so in "the most efficient way".
If you don't already know whether it exists, or how it will roughly work (lexically), you shouldn't be discussing it on p6d. Kicked back to p6l. The efficiency of storage isn't of your concern. Tackle the linguistical questions first: Should an explicit bool type be part of the language? If so, how should it work? C<my bool $y = (0 but true)> storing only a truth property but no value makes little sense in the context of the larger language. So does handling truth as something other than a property. > (3) Context. How to determine it, how to force it. Hypothesis: There > is a one-to-one relationship between Type and Context, such that there > is a context that matches every type, and a type that matches every > context (except void). Again... > > (4) Typecasting. How int <--> num, num <--> str, str <--> bool, etc. > Generic typecasting rules: how to define user classes that can typecast > to/from str, int, bool, etc. This gets into Perl6 OO, but we may need > to request some preliminary decisions before then, because the > implications are substantial. ....and again... > > Let's open these for discussion. Questions/proposals/issues, anyone? and again... what's the scope of p6d, and how does it differ from p6l? -- Bryan C. Warnock bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
