Re^4: Informal Poll: why aren't you using traits?


Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
	PerlMonks

Re^4: Informal Poll: why aren't you using traits?

by blm (Hermit)

on Nov 19, 2005 at 05:38 UTC ( [id://510039]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re^3: Informal Poll: why aren't you using traits?
in thread Informal Poll: why aren't you using traits?

I would say that I had not heard of traits though I remember somewhere a mention of roles in perl 6. While reading the first few posts, a question formed in my mind "How are roles/traits different to interfaces?". Indeed your language in this post convinced me to post this.

...you can query the class to find out what traits/roles it implements.

Comment on Re^4: Informal Poll: why aren't you using traits?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: Informal Poll: why aren't you using traits?
by stvn (Monsignor) on Nov 19, 2005 at 14:02 UTC

"How are roles/traits different to interfaces?"

An interface (in the Java sense) has no implementation, it is only a "signature" which the consumer of the interface promises to conform to.

Roles/Traits are allowed to have implementations. The methods in a trait are "flattened" into the consuming class. This is not all that different from just "exporting" methods from the trait's namespace into the classes namespace, except that there are a set of "rules" and "guidelines" set out in the Traits papers (see the SEE ALSO section of Class::Trait for some good links). These rules and guidelines actually make it so that Trait ordering is irrelevant, which right there removes a lot of the issues normally associated with MI and mix-ins.

-stvn

[reply]

In Section Meditations