# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #120916]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# <URL: https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=120916 >
<FROGGS> I could just make a role (Slangy) that stubs attributes...
wait, we don't have that feature :o)
<FROGGS> or do we?
<FROGGS> p: my role Slangy { has $.grammar = ...; }; class COBOL does Slangy { }
<camelia> rakudo-parrot a77214: ( no output )
<FROGGS> p: my role Slangy { has $.grammar = ...; }; class COBOL does
Slangy { }; my $cobol = COBOL.new
<camelia> rakudo-parrot a77214: OUTPUT«Stub code executed [...]
<FROGGS> cool
<FROGGS> p: my role Slangy { has $.grammar = ...; }; class COBOL does
Slangy { }; my $cobol = COBOL.new( :grammar )
<camelia> rakudo-parrot a77214: ( no output )
<FROGGS> very nice
<masak> FROGGS: though it could be argued that the above should blow
up at composition-time.
<masak> as in, at the final '}' after the 'does Slangy'.
<FROGGS> true, but it is good enough for me
<masak> p: role R { method foo { ... } }; class C does R {}; BEGIN {
say "alive" }
<camelia> rakudo-parrot a77214: OUTPUT«===SORRY!===Method 'foo' must
be implemented by C because it is required by a role»
<masak> FROGGS: yes, I'm just thinking from the perspective of rakudobugs ;)
* masak submits one
I'm not aware that the spec requires stubbed attributes to blow up at
composition time. So consider this 50% a rakudobug, 50% a spec
(clarification) request. I can submit a separate spec issue too if
anyone feels that'd be a good idea.
Even if we arrive at the conclusion that stubbed attributes in roles
shouldn't work like that, I think that "Stub code executed" is LTA in
this case. Why not something like "Cannot instantiate: Attribute
$.grammar not initialized" ?
