To me, it is one of the first "natural" uses of indirect object syntax.IMHO, there is only one use for indirect object syntaxt, and it is poetry
The only thing I have against it, is that you would need to say "use isa qw(Bar)". It should be possible to do this shorter.It's too late. As a core language feature, maybe, but it's too late for that. But by way of yucky yucky yuck yuck and not during compiletime? No.
In reply to Re: package Foo; isa Bar; why not?
by Anonymous Monk
in thread package Foo; isa Bar; why not?
by liz
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |