> "John" == John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> 1) Methods are always public
John> 2) Variables are always private (and in this case that means that other
John> instances may not view the instance variables of an object; I don't
John> recall whether the class can see the ivars of its
On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 07:26:37AM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> Smalltalk doesn't give you any privacy options, but it does dictate a
> certain degree of privacy. Smalltalk is big on "information hiding" as
> part of the whole "OOP is an extension of Abstract Data Typing" concept.
>
> 1) Methods ar
From: Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 05:49:34PM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
>> That way you could choose to impliment Smalltalk or C++ style
>> protections (public, private, protected, etc)
>
>Last I checked Smalltalk had no privacy protection.
>
>> So, for Smalltalk t
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 05:49:34PM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> So, for example, lets say I have an object $foo, which is an instance of
> Class A. In one method, foo tries to access an instance variable of
> $bar, an instance of Class B (not inherited from Class A).
This is a naughty thing to do.
Damian Conway wrote:
>
> Schwern explained:
>
>> Going away? No way, it's SPREADING! We might wind up with AUTOGLOB, too.
>>
>> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/324.pod
>
> Though it won't be called AUTOGLOB (globs *are* going away),
> and its semantics might be closer to those portrayed i
At 06:48 AM 11/9/2001 +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > At 04:21 PM 11/8/2001 -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> >>So, does this mean my other heart's desire of operator overloading might
> >>be coming forth? (I know, I know, here I am, a smalltalker, asking for
>
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 04:21 PM 11/8/2001 -0800, John Rudd wrote:
>>So, does this mean my other heart's desire of operator overloading might
>>be coming forth? (I know, I know, here I am, a smalltalker, asking for
>>operator overloading ... but, what are the smalltalkers g
Schwern explained:
> Going away? No way, it's SPREADING! We might wind up with AUTOGLOB, too.
>
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/324.pod
Though it won't be called AUTOGLOB (globs *are* going away),
and its semantics might be closer to those portrayed in:
http://www.yetanother.org
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 04:21:57PM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> So, does this mean my other heart's desire of operator overloading might
> be coming forth?
Yeah, that was mentioned in Apoc and Exewhatever 3.
--
Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl6 Quali
At 04:21 PM 11/8/2001 -0800, John Rudd wrote:
>So, does this mean my other heart's desire of operator overloading might
>be coming forth? (I know, I know, here I am, a smalltalker, asking for
>operator overloading ... but, what are the smalltalkers gonna do, take
>away my membership card?)
What,
Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 03:56:59PM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> > So, I'm reading various things about lots of changes for perl6, and some
> > arcane things going away, and stuff like that.. and I suddenly wondered
> > if one of my favorite features of Perl Objects (the
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 03:56:59PM -0800, John Rudd wrote:
> So, I'm reading various things about lots of changes for perl6, and some
> arcane things going away, and stuff like that.. and I suddenly wondered
> if one of my favorite features of Perl Objects (the one that keeps me
> from migrating t
At 03:56 PM 11/8/2001 -0800, John Rudd wrote:
>I suddenly wondered
>if one of my favorite features of Perl Objects is going away:
>AUTOLOAD.
Only over Damian's dead body... :)
Dan
--"it's like this"---
D
So, I'm reading various things about lots of changes for perl6, and some
arcane things going away, and stuff like that.. and I suddenly wondered
if one of my favorite features of Perl Objects (the one that keeps me
from migrating to tcl or python, cuz I can never find clear information
about whe
14 matches
Mail list logo
