On Mar 4, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Alek Storm wrote:
For the same reason we have set_attr, set_attr_str, get_attr, and
get_attr_str, even though they're only used by ParrotObject - it
allows for
multiple, concurrent object systems. This goal is mentioned in PDD
15, in
"What The Bytecode Sees". Why tie programmers into the default way of
doing
things? In Smalltalk, objects and classes work very differently, to
the
point where I have a wrapper object around every class. It would be a
whole
lot easier if I could define my own class implementation.
But part of the point of parrot is dynamic language interoperability.
Will perl6 and tcl be able to use that new class implementation without
a problem, and could you use perl6 and tcl classes and objects? This
of course assumes the language gets the added functionality to import
stuff across HLL's. There are times where different languages make
coding different aspects of a large program easier, so people might
want to use, say, perl for the string comparison, tcl for the gui, and
java for communicating over the network with a binary protocol. It's
just a rough example, but nevertheless, that is the potential of
parrot, without using weird embedding stuff.
