From @masak

<masak> rakudo​: class A { method foo() { say "A" } }; class B {}; my
$b = B.new; $b.A​::foo
<p6eval> rakudo 836c8c​: OUTPUT«A␤»
<masak> o.O
<masak> wait a minute.
<masak> the classes do not inherit from each other.
<jnthn> masak​: oh
<jnthn> masak​: In that case it'll try and explode.
<masak> I agree.
<masak> but that's actually two bugs, then.
<jnthn> well, it's the same underlying issue
* masak pretends not to hear that
<masak> two tickets coming up!

From @pmichaud

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 06​:41​:37AM -0700, Carl Mäsak wrote​:

<masak> rakudo​: class A { method foo() { say "A" } }; class B {}; my
$b = B.new; $b.A​::foo
<p6eval> rakudo 836c8c​: OUTPUT«A␤»
<masak> o.O
<masak> wait a minute.
<masak> the classes do not inherit from each other.
<jnthn> masak​: oh
<jnthn> masak​: In that case it'll try and explode.
<masak> I agree.
<masak> but that's actually two bugs, then.
<jnthn> well, it's the same underlying issue
* masak pretends not to hear that
<masak> two tickets coming up!

I agree that the existing behavior is wrong, but what
should happen here? Should it report a type mismatch on
the invocant when invoking A​::foo, or should it complain
that A​::foo isn't a valid method for a B object?

Pm

The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

From @moritz

On Mon Sep 21 12​:07​:15 2009, pmichaud wrote​:

I agree that the existing behavior is wrong, but what
should happen here? Should it report a type mismatch on
the invocant when invoking A​::foo, or should it complain
that A​::foo isn't a valid method for a B object?

I'd say the latter, because "type mismatch on the invocant" might be
mightily confusing.

Cheers,
Moritz

From @kyleha

This is an automatically generated mail to inform you that tests are now available in t/spec/S12-class/inheritance.t

commit 395a0b0e02df40b34795fa94d1e9cdcdecc82369
Author​: moritz <moritz@​c213334d-75ef-0310-aa23-eaa082d1ae64>
Date​: Sat Sep 26 16​:23​:50 2009 +0000

  [t/spec] test for RT #​69262
 
  git-svn-id​: http://svn.pugscode.org/pugs@&#8203;28419 c213334d-75ef-0310-aa23-eaa082d1ae64

diff --git a/t/spec/S12-class/inheritance.t b/t/spec/S12-class/inheritance.t
index 4260be3..db6f263 100644
--- a/t/spec/S12-class/inheritance.t
+++ b/t/spec/S12-class/inheritance.t
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ use v6;
 
 use Test;
 
-plan 36;
+plan 38;
 
 # L<S12/Classes/An "isa" is just a trait that happens to be another class>
 
@@ -20,6 +20,10 @@ class Foo::Bar is Foo {
     method super_baz ($self:) { return $self.Foo::baz() }
 }
 
+class Unrelated {
+    method something { 'bad' };
+}
+
 my $foo_bar = Foo::Bar.new();
 isa_ok($foo_bar, Foo::Bar);
 
@@ -47,6 +51,11 @@ my $fud;
 lives_ok { $fud = $foo_bar.getme.fud }, 'chained method dispatch on altered method';
 is($fud, "Foo::Bar::fud", "returned value is correct");
 
+is $foo_bar.Foo::baz, 'Foo::baz', '$obj.Class::method syntax works';
+#?rakudo todo 'RT 69262'
+dies_ok { $foo_bar.Unrelated::something() },
+    'Cannot call unrelated method with $obj.Class::method syntax';
+
 # See thread "Quick OO .isa question" on p6l started by Ingo Blechschmidt:
 # L<"http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/22220">
 

From @jnthn

On Sat Sep 26 09​:23​:06 2009, moritz wrote​:

On Mon Sep 21 12​:07​:15 2009, pmichaud wrote​:

I agree that the existing behavior is wrong, but what
should happen here? Should it report a type mismatch on
the invocant when invoking A​::foo, or should it complain
that A​::foo isn't a valid method for a B object?

I'd say the latter, because "type mismatch on the invocant" might be
mightily confusing.

Agree, done while putting back .A​::foo style syntax, and un-todo'd the
now passing test for this.

Thanks,

Jonathan

@jnthn - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved'