But if Moose claims to implement the generalized term for all "loosely" related concepts, then it should also implement the specialized core meaning.
Did I miss a possibility to use having such that the method is called with the original $self?
If yes please show me how. *
It's like organizing "Pan-American Games" for Argentines and Canadians and excluding US Americans.
> but as that terminology and use is far from uncommon
In PHP and some other languages it's common to use "closure" synonymous for "anonymous function".
I call this bullshit, because neither is every anno function closing over variables from an outer scope nor are named functions excluded from being closures.
Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery
FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice
To avoid misunderstandings, I prefer Forwarding over Delegation, it's much easier to handle.
But it seems that Perl 6 is the source of this terminology, and that Moose just copied the concept.
*) does currying allow to change $self?
In reply to Re^13: RFC: OO Perl using Moo/Moose book
by LanX
in thread RFC: OO Perl using Moo/Moose book
by Perl300
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |