Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from June 2001
At 09:57 AM 6/27/2001 -0700, David Whipp wrote:
>When I started this thread, I knew everyone would tell me that
>delegation is the answer: I included the note that I knew about
>that, but I guess the bias against MI is just too strong.
Well, not *everyone* is against it. :) And the current @ISA stuff is MI,
albeit on a per-class basis rather than on a per-object one.
Anyway, as Damian mentioned, setting the .ISA property is a perfectly
reasonable sort of thing to do if the language supports this. From an
internals standpoint I'd ask that some serious thought as to the cost vs.
benefit relation is given. This will have one of the following possible
effects:
* Objects are bigger since they all need an .ISA property, if we toss the
per-class @ISA
* Method lookup is slower and more complex, since we need to check for both
a per-object and per-class ISA lookup
* We suck up more memory building fake classes (containing just an @ISA)
for you behind the scenes
None of the possibilities are show-stoppers, of course--it's just a matter
of which cost we want to pay for this.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
dan@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next