fluid-tech IRC Logs-2013-05-13

[09:45:34 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> cindyli: ping

[09:45:47 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> pong, yzen

[09:47:49 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> cindyli: sorry nevermind

[09:49:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> ok

[13:31:46 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> Bosmon: ping

[13:31:57 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> yzen

[13:32:22 CDT(-0500)]

[13:34:20 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> yzen - what kind of namespace is that

[13:34:34 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> lol a unique one

[13:34:46 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Surely that completely defeats the purpose of a namespace

[13:34:56 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> If we wanted a unique one, why would we bother to write it in the first place : P

[13:35:12 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> The default behaviour is already to put everything in a "unique, unnameable namespace"

[13:35:30 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> The purpose of writing a namespace is so that integrators can KNOW exactly what it is....

[13:36:04 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> ok

[13:36:17 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> another question, can i have a member that is a function

[13:36:29 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> with a specific set of args

[13:36:35 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> yes, that is fine

[13:36:42 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> Bosmon: is there an example ?

[13:36:46 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Well, what do you mean by a specific set of args?

[13:36:52 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> You can have a member which has RESOLVED to a function

[13:36:57 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> For example, by means of an expander

[13:37:11 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> but if you want there to be IoC-resolved arguments supplied to the function, it needs to be an invoker

[13:38:32 CDT(-0500)] <yzen> ok thanks