Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > =head1 TITLE
> >
> > C<my Dog $spot> should simply assert that
> > C<(!defined($spot) || $spot-E<gt>isa('Dog'))>
> >
> > And let them duke it out.
>
> You'd have my support for that...I was intending to release an RFC
> in the next day or two that is exactly along those lines.
Ewww... I *hate* writing formal stuff.
--
Piers
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a const... Michael Fowler
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a const... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a constructo... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a const... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a c... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call... Michael Fowler
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should ... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot sh... Michael Fowler
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spo... Michael Fowler
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should ... Damian Conway
- RE: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot sh... Piers Cawley
- RE: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a constructo... Evan Howarth
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a constructo... Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a const... James Mastros
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call a c... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should call... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should ... Buddha Buck
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot sh... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot sh... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 171 (v1) my Dog $spot should ... Jonathan Scott Duff
