On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:51:55PM -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 12:53:29PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > > The type of metaobject Foo.meta might be called "Class" if that's what the > > metaobject protocol decides it should be, but Perl the Language doesn't > > care. If so, then Foo.meta.isa(Class) would be true. But Foo.isa(Class) > > is still false. > > OK, in my previous message, you should apparently read "metaobject" for > "type object". But I think the questions still apply, as does the proposal > that all _metaobjects_ that currently are correlated with packages should > instead just _do_ Package.
And again I must correct myself, the above doesn't make sense. Based on what I'm seeing, the Perl 6 "type object" is the thing that claims the primary name associated with a class. Foo::<Bar> is the type object. The metaobject seems to be anonymous. And the package seems to be fairly questionable... given how generic you want to be, the Perl 6 implmentation probably can't assume that there is exactly one package associated with a given type object, either directly or indirectly. -- Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
