At 12:55 PM 8/7/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: >On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 10:04:15AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote: > > At 04:43 PM 8/7/00 +0000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote: > > > sub *BEGIN { ... } > > > sub *END { ... } > > > sub *INIT { ... } > > > sub *AUTOLOAD { ... } > > > sub *TIESCALAR { ... } > > > sub *FETCH { ... } > > > > Only half of those are subs. > >What do you mean? I meant that BEGIN, END, and INIT aren't declared as subs at present but named blocks. I was surprised to discover that they're put in the symbol table anyway though. But they're definitely in a different class, syntactically if nothing else. -- Peter Scott Pacific Systems Design Technologies
- RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as the pref... Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*>... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to util... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal... John Porter
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal... Bart Lateur