Do we care about aliasing required methods

[stevan]

There is value in knowing that a method was not defined in a package, meaning that it is not owned by that package. But is there value in knowing this when it comes to required methods?

Required methods will get composed in from roles, and they will be inherited from abstract classes, but they are mostly just markers that something is missing. They can't conflict since their bodies are always the same (NULL) and when you have two of the same name it is the same as having one.

Currently we create a new CV each time (source) so we aren't even aliasing them now, the question is do we even want to.

The key thing I can think of that we are missing is that we don't know the original role/class of the required method, which could be very useful in debugging.