Qua, 2008-04-30 às 08:56 -0700, Ovid escreveu: > I had initially thought this, but think about the case where someone > wants to rewrite something to be compliant to another interface. If I > pass a CGI::Simple object to a method expecting a CGI object, there's > an excellent chance that it will *just work*, even though there's no > relation between the two. In this case, a role really doesn't work.
This makes me think that 'realises' has a considerably more common usage than I thought... Every time you implement something like CGI::Simple, you would like to say 'CGI::Simple realises CGI'. Of course that, in an ideal OO world, CGI would be an abstract role that both the default CGI implementation and CGI::Simple would 'do'. But that seems to javaish to me (read that as something I hate;), and having how to 'lie' about who you are seems more like a Perl thing to do... daniel
