Sex, 2008-05-02 às 21:49 +0200, TSa escreveu: > Daniel Ruoso wrote: > > In fact, it simply means that it's up to that object's metaobject to > > answer that, and not to a supra-meta-model to be able to answer to all > > of the possible metamodel implementations. > Since all three forms are derived from a programmer's declaration > involving names the problem is simple lookup, indeed. The fact that > N objects share one meta object is just for reducing the memory > footprint. You could make every object carry the full meta info > around.
And more importantly, the fact is that they *can* carry the full meta info around, and even more importantly, they might even build completely different set of features. > > You can do that as "shortcuts" and "optimizations" that are indeed > > needed in order to actually bootstrap the system, but that's not what > > the type system is. > Would you be so kind to enlighten me what the type system is, if > not a type calculation overlaid over a value calculation? I think that migth be the key point to understand our disagreement. There's no such thing as *the* Perl 6 type system, there's *a default* type system declared in the spec, but what Perl 6 has is a *meta object protocol* that allows you to deal with several type systems at once. daniel
