On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 09:34:32PM -0400, Sartak wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Stevan Little
stevan.lit...@iinteractive.com wrote:
If we want to keep it, lets keep it, but if we don't really have a reason,
lets just get rid of it.
Get rid of it. We don't pass in the meta-attr
In December, mst committed ec2e2ee5a0f010fe09d57e0176717b6b4f5671a2, which
removes the meta-attr object as the third argument to triggers, saying
unsupport passing meta-attr object to triggers because (a) it's not tested
(b) it's not documented (c) it makes it impossible to not close over
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:
I don't know how to weigh these two concerns, though:
* It has been documented and working for as long as I can remember that
triggers receive the meta-attr object.
That's not true. For a long time, immutablized classes have not passed the
Personally, I don't think we need to pass that meta-attribute, if you
really want/need it, then you can do this:
trigger = sub {
my $self = shift;
$self-meta-find_attribute_by_name('foo')-...
...
}
The only tricky part of the above workaround is that you need to know
the name of
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 11:40:43AM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
Personally, I don't think we need to pass that meta-attribute, if you
really want/need it, then you can do this:
trigger = sub {
my $self = shift;
$self-meta-find_attribute_by_name('foo')-...
...
}
The only
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Stevan Little
stevan.lit...@iinteractive.com wrote:
If we want to keep it, lets keep it, but if we don't really have a reason,
lets just get rid of it.
Get rid of it. We don't pass in the meta-attr for default or builder
either. It's just going to bite us in the
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 09:43:45AM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
That's not true. For a long time, immutablized classes have not passed
the meta-attr to the trigger (except from the constructor).
ec2e2ee5 is mst's commit (Dec 9 2008) removing the meta-attr argument.
% git blame -M -w
