Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two

On Feb 2, 2011, at 11:44 PM, David Golden wrote:

> FWIW, I would be happy to see 'method' added without signatures.  Or,
> put differently, I'd hate to see 'method' not happen because we're
> waiting for an officially sanctioned implementation of signatures.
> 
> Since I'd want signatures for regular (non-method) subroutines, too,
> I'd prefer to see the two concepts separated so I can have my cake and
> eat it while waiting for the next cake to arrive.

This seems entirely reasonable to me. I wouldn't mind seen a design spec for signatures, too, but that needn't hold up adding the method keyword any more than it would hold up the sub keyword. N'est pas?

Best,

David

• Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant by Chia-liang Kao
• Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant by David Golden
• [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant) by chromatic
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by Zefram
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by Chris Prather
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant) by chromatic
• [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by chromatic
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Zefram
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Sam Vilain
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Zefram
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Sam Vilain
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Reverend Chip
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by David E. Wheeler
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Zefram
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by David Golden
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by David E. Wheeler
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by Matt Sergeant
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by chromatic
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method' take two by chromatic
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by Zefram
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by Eric Brine
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by Reini Urban
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by David Golden
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicitinvocant) by Steffen Mueller
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant) by David E. Wheeler
• Re: [PATCH] use feature 'method'; (was Re: Proposal: "$->" forimplicit invocant) by David Golden
• Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant by Johan Vromans
• Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant by Zefram
• Re: Proposal: "$->" for implicit invocant by H.Merijn Brand