Re: RFC for $ME class variable (was Re: RFC 124 (v1) Sort order forany hash)

2000-08-24 Thread Nathan Wiger
Bart Lateur wrote: > > >I hate it, it's miserable. Too much hidden trickery and special cases. > > Quite the countrary, I should think. Have you seen the subs > self_or_default and self_or_CGI in the source of CGI.pm? Yep, if you check out my File::Remote module I hijacked them. Thanks again,

Re: RFC for $ME class variable (was Re: RFC 124 (v1) Sort order forany hash)

2000-08-23 Thread Bart Lateur
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000 18:02:21 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote: >I hate it, it's miserable. Too much hidden trickery and special cases. Quite the countrary, I should think. Have you seen the subs self_or_default and self_or_CGI in the source of CGI.pm? These serve to check if a sub is called as a functi

Re: RFC for $ME class variable (was Re: RFC 124 (v1) Sort order forany hash)

2000-08-23 Thread Nathan Wiger
> You can have your cake, but not force us to eat it too... > > Like $AUTOLOAD, $ME would be dynamically scoped: The first time I saw the bareword "self" keyword I almost wet myself in horror, but I would say that $AUTOLOAD is a disaster that should not be repeated. And that's the way that this

Re: RFC for $ME class variable (was Re: RFC 124 (v1) Sort order forany hash)

2000-08-21 Thread David L. Nicol
Damian Conway wrote: > And don't forget to include my idea that $ME be scoped locally like > $AUTOLOAD, so that the "self" and "this" and "I" and "myself" camps can > have their respective cakes but the rest of us don't have to eat them: Given 1: full access to the "behind-the-scenes"