[Perl5-syntax] Method signatures: are slurpy params optional by default?

[Matt S Trout]

On 26/04/11 20:15, Buddy Burden wrote:
> David (and phaylon),
>
>> I assume that Perl 6 has not dropped the possibility of empty arrays.
>>
>> Empty arrays are valid syntax means that "an array argument" can be empty.
>
> I hear you guys, but--at least in the abstract--there is a difference
> between an empty array and no array at all.  That is, I certainly
> agree that this:
>
>      my @a = ();
>      $obj->foo(@a);
>
> must be considered legal no matter what, but that's not technically the same as:
>
>      $obj->foo();
>
> Now, as a practical matter, if we're talking about Perl5, there isn't
> really a way to distinguish between the two (barring some sort of Deep
> Magic(tm)).  But perhaps in Perl6 there is; I dunno.

Perl6::Contexts actually manages to distinguish. But I think it's 
probably better to accept that

>> From the abstract perspective, I'd still be curious to know how Perl6
> will handle such questions, if anyone has any insight.

You'd be better off asking the perl6 people if you want to know (though 
I think the answer is that $obj->foo(@a) in the camelia spec is more 
like $obj->foo(\@a) in perl5). This list is perl5-syntax for a reason - 
we might love stealing our little sister's ideas but it's still a 
different language :)