Hi, wolverian wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 02:26:02PM -0400, Matt Fowles wrote: >> $.foo >> @.foo >> %.foo >> >> and their ilk operate on the current invocant, $?SELF. This leads >> naturally toward &.foo also refering to $?SELF. But as we all know >> the & is optional on function calls... > > I believe you are thinking in Perl 5. :) In Perl 6, &foo is a > reference to the function foo, and never a call. That makes it > symmetric with the other $.foo notations.
yes, but with parens, it *is* a call: sub foo(...) {...} say &foo(...); # Calls &foo say foo(...); # Calls &foo say &foo; # "CODE(0x....)" or somesuch (FWIW, I agree with Matt, but Juerd's ./method is nice, too. And we shouldn't forget that Perl 6's OO is *far* more than that "method on self" thing. I favour .method meaning $?SELF.method, but this only a very minor issue when comparing with roles, autogenerated accessors, anonymous roles|classes, parameterized roles, etc. :)) --Ingo -- Linux, the choice of a GNU | The next statement is not true. The generation on a dual AMD | previous statement is true. Athlon! |