[Mono-list] late linking & dynamic invocation ...

Michael Meeks michael@ximian.com
08 Jul 2002 09:41:07 +0100

Hi Ben,

On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 10:36, Ben Hutchison wrote:
> As I said in an earlier message, would you care to propose a syntax for this
> feature that will handle overloaded methods?

	Well - on further reflection, I don't see why (particularly) there
should be any real problem with overloaded methods - it could be
possible for a delegate to map to a set of methods, until Invoke time -
surely ?

> Let me spell it out: you can have many methods with the same name but
> different signatures. How are you going to indicate which one you mean? You
> will need to include type info, so you've just lost what you tried to gain.

	? you need the type information anyway to marshal the arguments
generically, and the 'Delegate' encodes that anyhow - surely ?

> Do you mean "coerce a method name to a delegate"? Delegates are distinct
> objects, so coercion would seem to involve an implicit object creation.
> AFAIK, (except boxing) it would be a sole case of runtime object creation
> without new keyword, and would require another syntax anyway to indicate the
> coercion. Too inconsistent, IMHO.

	Hmm; a Delegate is a very basic type, I don't think the argument is
good that a new keyword should be included.

	But I guess I need to stop complaining about the language, since
there's almost nothing that can be done about it.



 mmeeks@gnu.org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot