in reply to Re^2: Package level scope callbacks.
in thread Package level scope callbacks.

Overloading "&{}" really would be elegant.

Maybe someone should bring that up on the p6 list in the hope that it can be done over there.

Thinking about it again, I'd think no. When you call a sub with f(), you can certainly not overload it as it's dereferencing a glob (like &{*f}()), not a reference, and you can not bless globs the way you can do it with references.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Package level scope callbacks.
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Aug 01, 2004 at 21:20 UTC

    Hmmm, maybe.

    Will P6 have globs? Will P6 allow overloading of $obj.method( ... ) or $anonRef.( ... ). What, if anything will  use overload "&{}" do or mean?

    Interesting possibilities portend.

    Examine what is said, not who speaks.
    "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
    "Think for yourself!" - Abigail
    "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon

      Globs are a remnant from non-lexical days and are going away in Perl6. However, many other things are happening; stuff like compile-time modification of the very language and real macros la LISP come to mind, obviously, though in this case, they'll probably be overkill. Packages, classes, and modules will become first-level citizens in Perl6 (allowing stuff like anonymous packages), and there will probably be an elegant solution for your problem on that vector.

      I really can't wait to get my hands on the thing. :-) It will no doubt be scary and uncomfortable at first and we'll make mistakes like they were made in Perl5 (inherit from Exporter? OO interface for Data::Dumper? what the..?), but there's exciting stuff ahead.

      Makeshifts last the longest.