Jonathan Worthington wrote:
OK, so I've added a REQUIREMENTS section to the objects PDD now and
filled it out with some (hopefully most) of what Perl 6 and .Net need as
a start.
Thanks Jonathan, it's a great start!
Allison
Allison Randal wrote:
More specifically: If you have any questions related to a PDD in clip,
please add them to a QUESTIONS section at the end of the PDD. For
requirements, use REQUIREMENTS. Neither of these sections will live in
the final version of the PDD, so it's a flag for me to process th
chromatic wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 09:49, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Would it be a good idea to start collecting requirements together from
different language implementors so that when the time comes to work on
the OO PDD, there is already a good description of what it needs to do?
P
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 05:49:08PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Allison Randal wrote:
> >>I think the object model needs a thorough going over in general
> >Yup. It's on the list right after I/O, threads, and events.
> >...
> >Ruby is a serious OO language, but it's not finished yet. For t
On Monday 23 October 2006 09:49, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Would it be a good idea to start collecting requirements together from
> different language implementors so that when the time comes to work on
> the OO PDD, there is already a good description of what it needs to do?
> If so, I'm happ
Allison Randal wrote:
I think the object model needs a thorough going over in general
Yup. It's on the list right after I/O, threads, and events.
-- for
the reasons above and because it's an unproven system. I'm not
convinced that it will handle all of Perl 6's needs as is. No serious
OO langu
