Looks like a misunderstanding of the problem of indirect object, and definitely not a demonstration
Its amazing to see it go back all the way to http://search.cpan.org/~stevan/Moose-0.10/lib/Moose/Util/TypeConstraints.pm#Slightly_Less_Important_Caveat
See 2001 indirect object in camel book , Unconfuse filehandles and classes, Indirect object syntax (RE: Beginnings of Online CGI Course), Why was indirect object syntax inferred here?o
In reply to Re: Moose::Util::TypeConstraints - Querying subtype() Caveat
by Anonymous Monk
in thread Moose::Util::TypeConstraints - Querying subtype() Caveat
by kcott
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |