Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2022
On 2022-01-24 11:20 a.m., Ovid via perl5-porters wrote: > I've been thinking about this a lot and I wanted to run an idea past P5P. Corinna tremendously cleans up Perl's OOP capabilities. It would be nice to have something like that for procedural code. I have no sponsor for this, but I was thinking about a `module` keyword. It would complement Corinna syntax ... I realize that Raku has the module+class duality, but how does it help Perl that Corinna hasn't already done? Is the point that "module" is for routines that do NOT have associated private storage like static/shared class fields? Does Corinna have the concept of static classes like Java/etc where one can declare a class but can not instantiate an instance/object of it and the class methods can only be used as "ClassName::method_name()" or exported as "method_name()"? If Corinna does NOT have classes that can't be instantiated as objects, then I see a value to have a "module" which fills the standalone never used with an object role. But if Corinna does support static/non-instantiable classes, then I see no reason to have "module" too. Or if "module" exists, then Corinna should be that all classes must be instantiable, even if they are singletons due to having no fields. -- Darren DuncanThread Previous | Thread Next