in reply to Re^7: The future of Perl?
in thread The future of Perl?
We lose some error checking and ability to use it as role or put type checks or coercion (none of which I did either but some of it would be a one or two line addition) but I agree at this level. I’m not against plain old OOP and I’m not an OO fanatic.
Traits do bring a lot more power than push/pop (see Data::Perl::Role::Collection::Array or Moose::Meta::Attribute::Native::Trait::Array) and handles is a super convenient way to expose functionality of subobject or trait/attribute to the parent in semantically pleasing ways; for example a web spider object would have a user agent but it would be pleasant to have $spider->get instead of having to write $spider->user_agent->get. All still pretty trivial examples and ultimately all the MOP stuff is about shortcuts and sensible building blocks and techniques for distinguishing and mixing them for things that are just plain Perl underneath that anyone could do anyway. The bare bones mop that may come into the core in 5.24 or something is an example of how little agreement there is on which features are crucial and which are in the way.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^9: The future of Perl?
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 15, 2014 at 03:28 UTC | |
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Dec 15, 2014 at 06:11 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 15, 2014 at 08:19 UTC | |
by salva (Canon) on Dec 15, 2014 at 10:09 UTC | |
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Dec 15, 2014 at 23:03 UTC |