On Tue Apr 21 06:35:05 2009, masak wrote:
> <masak> but... I just want a nice way to see if the hash was passed or
> not.
> [...]
> <moritz_> the problem is that we're doing in-band communication
> <moritz_> instead of asking the hash parameter if it was defined, we
> should ask the capture if that hash was given
> <masak> aye.
> <moritz_> especially since objects can respond with False to .defined
> at will anyway
> <frettled> the way you put it, it seems like there is a
> straight-forward way of doing so, and that would be good.
> <frettled> Conceptually, that's much cleaner than asking the variable.
<masak> lizmat: yes, for a long time I also wanted a way to introspect
the Capture.
<masak> lizmat: thing is, the Capture is caller-side, and when you want
to do the introspection, you're callee-side.
<jnthn> You already can keep a capture around if you want to look at it.
<jnthn> sub foo(|c, :$a, :$b) { c.exists('a') }
<masak> oh, troo.
<masak> so, there we go.
<masak> feature already in the language. :) case closed. :)
<masak> I guess we can close the RT ticket, too.
pmichaud's WHENCE solution is still not in place, but I don't see why
that should keep us from resolving the ticket.
So, resolving ticket.
