On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : Thanks, if it's looking like lvalues are really out I'll edit that draft : to take out the lvalue stuff and do it the other way.
No, lvalue methods are definitely in, and pretty much always have been. (There will be no problem with post-processing the value, as the next Apocalypse will make clear.) : (And if Damian's : happy with slots, that probably means we can get a lot of the other : attribute recipies out of the way pretty quick. Huzzah!) : : I had mixed feelings about defining and using a term like "slots" in a : draft that could mutate into a faq/tutorial, and went back and forth on : it (haven't done Self in years, and never in a non-academic setting.) : Think, think... Well, no, screw it: the best philosophy is to present : and (re)define the terms ourselves, as many as we need, but perhaps with : a footnote on language of origin. We don't want to invent new : terminology, we want to reuse it. Duh. :-P : : If no objections, we'll use the term "slots" to mean the aforementioned : attribute/method symmetry. I'll edit the text to give a proposed perl6 : "glossary" definition. "Slots" isn't quite right. Inside the class we distinguish attributes from methods. It's only outside the class that they're all methods. Larry
