On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:42:35AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote: : > +++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod Tue Feb 5 09:55:29 2008 : > @@ -2791,7 +2791,7 @@ : > are insufficient for defining the "pecking order" of code. Note that : > you can bind to either a bare block or a pointy block. Binding to a : > bare block conveniently leaves the topic in C<$_>, so the final form : > -above is equivalent to a C<default>. (Placeholders parameters may : > +above is equivalent to a C<default>. (Placeholder parameters may : > also be used in the bare block form, though of course their types : > cannot be specified that way.) : : Is it forbidden to use placeholder parameters in conjunction with : "my"? Or would it simply not do anything useful? I ask because "Do : what I mean" would seem to imply that 'my Dog $^foo' would specify : $^foo's type as 'Dog'. Though if you start doing too much of that, : you're almost certainly better off explicitly defining a signature.
Indeed. : Also, how much trouble would we get in if we spelled the ubiquitous : alias for a method's invocant as C< $^_ > instead of C< $self >? Then we're back to confusing people over the difference between the object and the topic, and the topic-as-self breaks as soon as you topicalize some other way. And you can always throw in a "$_ := self" or a "given self" if you really want it. Plus $.foo is still only one character longer than .foo so it doesn't really get you much most of the time. Larry
