On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 2:23 PM, I Sop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Patrick R. Michaud via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: [perl #59576] [PATCH] 'property' scope for PAST::Var
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Date: Friday, October 3, 2008, 12:31 PM
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 02:16:01PM -0700, I Sop wrote:
> > >
> > > I just copied the 'attribute' method, renamed
> > everything, and changed the parameter order for the
> > 'getprop' op.
> >
> > Why should this be a PAST::Var node as opposed to simply
> > using a
> > PAST::Op node with :pirop('getprop') and/or
> > :pirop('setprop') ?
> >
> > Pm
>
>
> Why is this different than attribute access?
>
Maybe, because an attribute access can be more complex, or 'nested', if you
like. For instance, consider this pseudo code:
foo.bar.baz = 1
>From the top of my head, I would implement this as a PAST::Var, of type
'attribute', where the attribute is itself represented by a PAST::Var node,
again of type 'attribute'.
so:
PAST::Var (foo, PAST::Var(bar, baz))
(not sure if that notation makes any sense, but the first operand is the
object to be indexed, the second is the key).
A property on the other hand is simpler; it's just a 'tag' on the object.
(or maybe it can be accessed in a similar way as attributes, the example
above, ?)
Just a thought.
kjs
