HaloO,
Jonathan Lang wrote:
class GenSquare does GenPoint does GenEqual
{
has Int $.side;
method equal ( GenSquare $p -- Bool )
{
return $self.GenPoint::equal($p) and $self.side == $p.side;
}
}
This is exactly what I don't want. Such an equal method needs to be
written in each
Tim Bunce wrote:
That's going to cause pain when people using older parsers try to read
docs written for newer ones. Would a loud warning plus some best-efforts
fail-safe parsing be possible?
Indeed. And that's a important use-case.
But best-effort is difficult when you're talking about
Jonathan Lang wrote:
If I understand you correctly, the pain to which you're referring
would come from the possibility of a name that's reserved by the newer
version of Pod, but not by the older version. Wouldn't the simplest
solution be to let a Pod document announce its own version, much
Author: particle
Date: Fri Oct 13 11:08:30 2006
New Revision: 14918
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/pdd03_calling_conventions.pod
Log:
[PDD03[: clarify examples for :named syntax
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/pdd03_calling_conventions.pod
In a message dated Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Jonathan Lang writes:
Since Baz does both Foo and Bar, you cannot use type-checking to
resolve this dilemma.
Why not? Why shouldn't this work:
my Foo $obj1 = getBaz(); # object is a Baz
$obj1.baz(); # Foo::baz is called
my Bar $obj2 =
Trey Harris wrote:
In a message dated Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Jonathan Lang writes:
Since Baz does both Foo and Bar, you cannot use type-checking to
resolve this dilemma.
Why not? Why shouldn't this work:
my Foo $obj1 = getBaz(); # object is a Baz
$obj1.baz(); # Foo::baz is
On 10/7/06, Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The CI formatting code specifies that the contained text is
to be set in an Iitalic style
I've probably been hanging around Web standards nazis for too long,
but can we get a separate code to mark the title of a document that
can't be linked
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 04:56:05PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Trey Harris wrote:
: All three objects happen to be Baz's, yes. But the client code doesn't
: see them that way; the first snippet wants a Foo, the second wants a Bar.
: They should get what they expect, or Baz can't be said to do
Here's the Parrot::Coroutine patch; I will commit this if nobody
objects.
It seems to me that this should be mentioned in docs/compiler_faq.pod
as an alternative way to do coroutines . . . I will take a look at this.
In fact, it might be safer to deprecate Coroutine.pmc until it can be
