faisalv at yahoo.com
Sun May 17 13:17:54 PDT 2009
> Subject: Re: Catchall proposal
> David-Sarah Hopwood wrote:
> To flesh this out a bit more, I propose the following handlers:
> set(id, val)
> setMissing(id, val)
> invoke(id, args)
> invokeMissing(id, args)
Would it be worth splitting the above into two separate proposals?
Proposal #1) Hooks for only missing actions.
Proposal #2) Pre/Post Hooks for existing actions.
I would expect that the goals for each of the two proposals would be
The focus of #1 would be to enhance the run-time metaprogramming facilities
The focus of #2 would be to enhance the security/correctness
(visibility, pre/post conditions, design by contract) of programs and
support aspect-oriented programming.
That way, one doesn't get mired by the other ;)
Any thoughts? (i.e. are these two proposals far too intertwined to
More information about the es-discuss