On 11/25/2002 9:02 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Pretty straightforward. Edit call_types.txt. First parameter's the
return type, the rest are the parameter types. Use p for any generic
i've stuffed a struct pointer into a PMC type. Do please only add in
signatures for functions you're actually going
Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Be kind to Piers.
Ah... Yes do. I need all the kindness I can get.
--
Piers
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite.
-- Jane Austen?
Hello everyone!
First of all - I do not closely follow perl6/parrot development. I read this
week on perl6 on www.perl.com but that's it - so if I'm completly off the
track, let me know.
Regarding the discussions about the hyper operator (eg adding elements of 2
arrays into another array)
On 11/27/2002 3:09 AM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:02 AM -0500 11/27/02, James Mastros wrote:
On 11/25/2002 9:02 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Pretty straightforward. Edit call_types.txt. First parameter's the
return type, the rest are the parameter types. Use p for any
generic i've stuffed a
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20021124
And some rough beast, its hour come 'round at last slouches toward...
And then the scansion goes to pot and I can't make a joke fit. Shame.
Anyhoo, it's time for another episode of the continuing saga of Perl 6
development. When I
At 2:07 AM + 11/24/02, kj Woolley (via RT) wrote:
One that leaves me hanging is source line 185 of PDD06 --
String and integer constants don't need to be put in a separate and
the sentence cuts there. Do you have any insight as to what the end of
that sentence should be? I'm guessing
It's coming up on six months since the last Apocalypse, and 3 months
since the Perl 6 Mini conference. Do we have any indication as to when
we can expect the next one?
--
Piers
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:33:23PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
: It's coming up on six months since the last Apocalypse, and 3 months
: since the Perl 6 Mini conference. Do we have any indication as to when
: we can expect the next one?
It'd be a lot faster if you guys would stop asking
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 09:57:41AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
So anyway, to actually answer your question, hopefully within the next
week or two, depending primarily on whether over the coming holiday
my wife's family decides to play games I like or games I don't like.
So ... what are the email
On Monday, November 25, 2002, 7:59:01 PM, you (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
you'll have to write the code so that compiler knows how to handle
it. While not overly hard, I think its a little much for something
that should be provided in the core. I think the design team should
at least
From: Ph. Marek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 09:10:19 +0100
So an usage could be
@a = @b =+ @b;
@a = @b =+ @b;
@a = @b += @b;
where the 2nd form would be the most intuitive (from reading this source).
Hmm, that would leave us with
@a =+= @b;
which
Dynamic scoping (take 2)
... a system of implicit argument passing ...
Larry pointed out [an error about threads]
The system of implicit argument passing was
intended to eliminate the need to use globals.
I was wrong about threads but that doesn't
change my view that globals are mostly evil.
A few questions, about stuff I am not sure I got right. Sorry if this
has already been resolved.
- What is the default behaviour (without using any pragma) of 1/0?
NaN or exception?
- Are these correct? What will they do?
my Int $i is bigint = 777_666_555_444_333_222_111;
print $i;
Hi,
This in an updated version of the numeric literals document. Hopefully
it is consistent with Michael's summary, and with discussions on the
list.
The portions that were wrong (complex numbers, etc..) have been
removed. Other parts (NaN, etc..) are still there, but I think that
they
Angel Faus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alphanumeric digits: Following the common practice,
perl will interpret the A letter as the digit 10, the B
letter as digit 11, and so on. Alphanumeric digits are case
insensitive:
16#1E3A7 # base 16
16:1e3a5 # the same
From: Angel Faus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 01:54:31 +0100
Much nicer. This document holds together and makes more sense than
the first (as it should). Nice work. A couple of corrections and
nit-picks, though.
This notation is designed to let you write very large or
very
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
This notation is designed to let you write very large or
very small numbers efficiently. The left portion of the
Ce is the coefficient, and the right is the exponent,
so a number of the form CC.CCCeXX is actually intepreted
as CC.CCC * 10**XX.
Your
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Bryan Hundven wrote:
Bryan,
you should suggest it on the perl6-internals mailinglist where
parrot development is happening. :-)
-ask
I don't know if anyone at parrotcode has thought of this idea, or
implemented it as a test (or joke)...
But what if you made an
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 02:26:08PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
Much nicer. This document holds together and makes more sense than
the first (as it should). Nice work. A couple of corrections and
nit-picks, though.
Indeed it is, much nicer.
This won't work for bases greater than 36, so we
There's something wrong with your links to the messages in the
documentation list. Whenever I click on one, I get the message Unable to
find thread. Please recheck the URL.
Joe Gottman
Excellent document! Here are my comments, tabbed text is how I would
have written it:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 01:54:31AM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
The left portion of the Ce is the coefficient, and the right is the
exponent,
The portion to the left of the Ce is the coefficient, and the
21 matches
Mail list logo
