HaloO,

Larry Wall wrote:
>      role Num is also does Complex {
>  	method im {...}
>      }

Is that the actual syntax? I mean is it the keyword pair
'is also' or does 'also' by itself have a meaning? With
a more natural 'role Num also does Complex'.


>  but roles are really supposed to be fairly immutable in the Perl 6
>  scheme of things, so such a declaration would probably have to require
>  that the Num role never have been composed into anything else yet.

Doesn't a role also do the package role? That is we might just
keep the uncomposed roles and their does-hierarchy around for
later method lookup.


>  Or we could say that you can't reopen the Num role; you can only
>  reopen the Num class and mix in the Complex role.  That's where it
>  stands at the moment.

BTW, how is it achieved to have a class Num and a role Num?
Can one just write

     role Blahh {...}

     class Blahh does Blahh {...}

or is there some hidden magic for built-in types? Array, Hash etc.
seem to pull the same stunt---but how?


Regards, TSa.
--