Em Sex, 2009-03-20 às 14:08 +0100, Jonathan Worthington escreveu: > It's probably a minor issue, but part of me wants Junction to be OK too > for explaining stuff. Telling people the default parameter type is Any, > to accept anything they can write Object and to accept just junctions > you write Junction is pretty clear...having to then explain why you > write Any and Object but then junction (lowercase) feels awkward.
everything is an Object. not everything is Any. That is still true. junction is a native type that doesn't do Any, and so far it seems to be the only one. The capital vs lowercase J does not change that, it only tells you that you cannot subclass "junction" as you can with non-native objects. > > Actually, if we support that, we kinda loose the point of making it a > > native type... > I don't quite follow this. The point of having it as native is that you don't need to do a high-level method call to implement the autothreading, since it's a native type, you can assume its representation format and go directly into its guts to get the values... > But it does bring an interesting point - if we have a Junction role > then it's probably something that people can do on their own classes > to make their own thingies that auto-threading. Meaning the auto-threading need to do a high-level method call to do that... > It had perhaps better require things doing the role to provide the ! > eigenstates private though, otherwise the dispatcher is going to be > rather unhappy... But... if the dispatcher needs to call it, it shouldn't be private right? or is the dispatcher a specific class that Junction implementation can trust? daniel
