John Siracusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1/18/06 11:06 PM, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Not to mention that 90% of the hacking done in Class:: and Object:: will
handled by the fact that Perl6 has actual OO syntax. (Look Ma, no hands!)
You won't need Class::MakeMethods because Perl6 will make your
On 1/19/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 19 January 2006 19:50, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Nothing. Just like it's not a problem if Perl6 uses one of the
Ruby-specific PMCs for storage. In fact, the alternate $repr idea is
specifically to allow for the use of foreign datatypes as
On Friday 20 January 2006 07:14, Rob Kinyon wrote:
I think this entire issue is rising out of the fact that very very few
people in this discussion are familiar with the design of the MOP.
Stevan and a few others are the primary movers and I'm lucky enough to
have been Stevan's sounding board
On Thursday 19 January 2006 21:53, Stevan Little wrote:
Okay, so when you say alternate storage then you mean that a class
like this:
class Foo {
has $.bar;
method new ($class, %params) {
$class.bless('p5Hash', %params);
}
method baz {
$.bar += 1;
On Thursday 19 January 2006 21:53, Stevan Little wrote:
With p5, you /can/ get to the underlying data structure. This is a
break which will hamper the backwards compatibility effort I think.
With Perl 5, you can *appear* to get to the underlying data structure. Yet
tie() is basically free
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-18 20:57 (-0500):
Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
Nonsense. OO isn't a set of features, and OO isn't syntax.
Granted, syntax can really help to understand OO, and a set of features
is nice, because it avoids having to re-invent wheels.
But OO is
On 1/19/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-18 20:57 (-0500):
Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
Nonsense. OO isn't a set of features, and OO isn't syntax.
Granted, syntax can really help to understand OO, and a set of features
is nice, because it
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 9:15 (-0500):
OOP is all about black-box abstraction.
This is probably the fundament of our disagreement.
OO is about objects, which CAN BE but DO NOT HAVE TO BE
black-box/opaque.
It is customary, and good style, to treat objects as black boxes, but
their actual
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 18:54, Stevan Little wrote:
Or are you thinking that a Perl 6 value should be blessed into a
Perl
5 package?
That's closer to what I had in mind.
I think there is a real serious issue here since the hash the Perl
Rob Kinyon wrote:
OOP is all about black-box abstraction. To that end, three items have been
identified as being mostly necessary to achieve that:
1) Polymorphism - aka Liskov substitutability
2) Inheritance - aka specialization
3) Encapsulation
P5 excels at #1, does #2 ok, and
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 20:02, Rob Kinyon wrote:
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Answer me this then -- under your scheme, can I subclass a Perl 5 class
with Perl 6 code, instantiate the subclass, and use that object in Perl 5
code as if the subclass were Perl 5 code,
On 1/19/06, Rob Kinyon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OOP is all about black-box abstraction. To that end, three items have
been identified as being mostly necessary to achieve that:
1) Polymorphism - aka Liskov substitutability
2) Inheritance - aka specialization
3) Encapsulation
P5
On 1/19/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 20:02, Rob Kinyon wrote:
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Answer me this then -- under your scheme, can I subclass a Perl 5 class
with Perl 6 code, instantiate the subclass, and use that object in
On Thursday 19 January 2006 19:50, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Nothing. Just like it's not a problem if Perl6 uses one of the
Ruby-specific PMCs for storage. In fact, the alternate $repr idea is
specifically to allow for the use of foreign datatypes as storage.
Luke's excellent example is to use a
On 1/19/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Next question. If Ponie and Perl 6 are both running on Parrot, and
if Ponie
has PMCs that represent Perl 5 data containers, such as p5hash,
p5array,
p5symbol, and so on, what's the problem with having a Perl 6 object
that uses
one of those
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 22:50 (-0500):
There's already a mechanism in the P6 OO system for specifying the
internal representation of the instance.
Now there's the actual problem in its baremost form: indeed the *P6* OO
system has that, but the *P5* OO system (excuse me for calling it
Hello All,
In reading over the Synopsis again in hopes of finding more
information regarding the different repr types (see the warnocked
post entitled Construction and Initialization of repr types other
than P6opaque), I stumbled onto some issues with the Perl 6 OO model
and bless
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 14:13, Stevan Little wrote:
Do we really still need to retain the old Perl 5 version of bless?
What purpose does it serve that p6opaque does not do in a better/
faster/cleaner way?
Interoperability with Perl 5 code.
Now if you want to write a p6opaque - Perl 5
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 14:13, Stevan Little wrote:
Do we really still need to retain the old Perl 5 version of bless?
What purpose does it serve that p6opaque does not do in a better/
faster/cleaner way?
Interoperability with Perl 5
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 14:13, Stevan Little wrote:
Do we really still need to retain the old Perl 5 version of bless?
What purpose does it serve that p6opaque does not do in a better/
faster/cleaner way?
Interoperability with Perl 5 code.
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 17:57, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
I'll play your semantic game if you play my what-if game.
I have a fair bit of Perl 5 code. Ponie works. I want to migrate my Perl 5
code to Perl 6 slowly. Everything new is Perl 6
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 17:57, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
I'll play your semantic game if you play my what-if game.
I have a fair bit of Perl 5 code. Ponie works. I want to migrate my Perl 5
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 18:54, Stevan Little wrote:
Are you thinking that one would be able to bless a Perl 5 reference
into a Perl 6 package?
Not really, but depending on the what Perl 6 bless() does it might work.
I would argue then that we really don't need Perl 6 bless for this,
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:11, Rob Kinyon wrote:
As for how that will be handled, I would think that it would be as follows:
- in Perl6, objects created in another language will be treated as
p6opaque (unless some other unbox is a more suitable $repr).
... and I specify this exactly
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:11, Rob Kinyon wrote:
As for how that will be handled, I would think that it would be as follows:
- in Perl6, objects created in another language will be treated as
p6opaque (unless some other unbox is a
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) by default, your object is opaque
2) if you don't want this, you can always use bless()
For interoperability with Perl 5 classes, I don't want to use an opaque
object. Ergo, I want to use bless() (or something, but does that explain why
I
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:39, Rob Kinyon wrote:
No, you want to specify the $repr in CREATE(). But, p6hash will still
not be the same as a ref to an HV. Frankly, I think you're better off
letting Parrot mediate things the same way it would mediate Ruby and
Perl6 or Perl5 and Python.
Excuse my ignorance of the finer points, but I thought the reason for
bless's continued existence was so that the same sort of brilliant OO
experimentation that Damian and others have done with pure Perl 5 can
continue to be done in pure Perl 6 without having to hack p6opaque?
Trey
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:39, Rob Kinyon wrote:
No, you want to specify the $repr in CREATE(). But, p6hash will still
not be the same as a ref to an HV. Frankly, I think you're better off
letting Parrot mediate things the same way it
On 1/18/06, Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excuse my ignorance of the finer points, but I thought the reason for
bless's continued existence was so that the same sort of brilliant OO
experimentation that Damian and others have done with pure Perl 5 can
continue to be done in pure Perl 6
On 1/18/06 11:06 PM, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Not to mention that 90% of the hacking done in Class:: and Object:: will
handled by the fact that Perl6 has actual OO syntax. (Look Ma, no hands!)
You won't need Class::MakeMethods because Perl6 will make your accessors for
you.
There's more to life than
On Jan 18, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Trey Harris wrote:
Excuse my ignorance of the finer points, but I thought the reason
for bless's continued existence was so that the same sort of
brilliant OO experimentation that Damian and others have done with
pure Perl 5 can continue to be done in pure
32 matches
Mail list logo
