On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 06:55:11 +0300, Alexey Trofimenko <la-trash@yandex.ru> wrote: > P.S. I have one (almost unrelated to topic) observation: if sigil is a > part of a variable name, then C< Package::$var > makes more sense than > perl5 C< $Package::var >. (AFAIK, PHP5 works this way) And this requires > less magic from perl. I agree... that's inconsistent. I have another question: Are package/class/grammar namespaces valid objects in Perl6? I would assume yes, so you can call methods on them for meta-purposes. Would there be a default Namespace::postcircumfix:«< >» operator, which would make the above code look like: Package<$var> aka Package.<$var>? This would continue to make sense even when the namespace objects are passed to a function: sub foo (Class $who) { my $thing := $who<$var>; my &func := $who<&func>; # how would I do this otherwise? } I assume the second line can't really be done through stringification due to singletons. Well, on second thought, you could make $foo.meta (or whatever) start answering to CLASS(0xDEADBEEF) style classnames. Those are probably needed for debugging or something anyways. Ashley WintersThread Previous | Thread Next