--- Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> chromatic wrote:
> > The thinking at the last design meeting was that you'd explicitly
> say
> > "Consider this class closed; I won't muck with it in this
> application"
> > at compile time if you need the extra optimization in a particular
> > application.
>
> In Dylan, this is called a sealed class. It tells the compiler that
> it's safe to resolve method names to slot numbers at parse time,
> IIRC. Seems like a nice idea.
Sounds like a potential keyword, or perhaps a ubiquitous method, or
both. But how to differentiate "sealed under optimization" versus
"sealed under inheritance"?
Perhaps it would be better to specify an optimizability attribute at
some level?
package Foo is optimized "all";
sub foo is optimized("!call") {...}
=Austin
