Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2012
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Reini Urban <rurban@x-ray.at> wrote: > Simplier? A MOP will always be more complicated and slower. > Our approach is always more general than the tighter OO systems in > other languages you are thinking of. I don't think a MOP has to be slower, in fact I can imagine it being faster than what we're using now. Currently we have to deal with lot of the overhead due to the mismatch between the kind of semantics people want (powerful stuff like a mop) and the building blocks we have available to build that (stashes/globs/packages). LeonThread Previous | Thread Next