On 10/28/05, Ovid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The code is designed well enough that adding new features is quick and
easy. Unfortunately, whenever I need to change my code I fire up a Web
server and view the results in the browser and then write the tests
after I've written the code (this is
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:21:40 -0800, Kevin Scaldeferri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 14, 2004, at 2:10 PM, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
Yes. Ditch emacs. It knows only the *wrong* styles.
uh... yeah... okay. You realize elisp is Turing-complete, right?
Um, yeah. Right. My cat is Turing
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:14:32 +0100, H.Merijn Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue 14 Dec 2004 16:04, Clayton, Nik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've normally got enough going on in my head when writing code,
worrying about the house style should not be one of them.
Wrong. It should be. You
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 01:03:19PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
Schwern observed:
This may be a consequence of the example used
while $n++ then $foo $bar
which I immediately associated with.
if $n++ then $foo $bar
Yeah, I can certainly see that.
Perhaps this is yet
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 09:46:07PM -0500, Danny R. Faught wrote:
Re: The Craft of Software Testing...
Adam Turoff wrote:
It's out of print and nearly impossible to find. I haven't read it yet,
so I can't say whether it is as seminal as McBreen says it is.
Interesting - bn.com claims
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 11:52:37AM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
Three I would thoroughly recommend, although not Perl related in any
way, are:
Lessons Learned in Software Testing: a Context-driven Approach
Cem Kaner, James Bach
Publisher: John Wiley Sons Inc; ISBN:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:49:40PM -0600, Nick Pinckernell wrote:
The idea is: a structured Javadoc style system for Perl. It would be very
dependant on multiline comments (I've seen the Perl 6 RFC).
I think this idea would be really good for Perl 6, because, in my opinion,
POD is lacking.
On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 10:55:42AM -0600, Nick Pinckernell wrote:
I agree with the first three items right out of
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/5.pod
1. IT'S NOT INTUITIVE
Intuitive is one of those meaningless buzzwords like maintainable.
It sounds good, but it's meaningless. See MJD's take on
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 03:20:26PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Acknowledgements, Announcements and Apologies
First of all, I plead insanity for my mistake of last week's summary.
PONIE does not stand for 'Perl On New Internal Architecture', it
obviously stands for 'Perl On New
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 01:06:03PM -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
Also, given that asynchronous IO is a fairly unpopular programming
technique these days (non-blocking event-loop IO and blocking
threaded IO are far more common), I would think long and hard before
placing support for it as a core
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Piers Cawley wrote:
Adam Turoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As it *appears* today, regular dispatching and multimethod dispatching
are going to be wired into the langauge (as appropriate). Runtime
dispatch behavior will continue to be supported
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:31:54PM -, Dan Sugalski wrote:
For methods, each object is ultimately responsible for deciding what to
do when a method is called. Since objects generally share a class-wide
vtable, the classes are mostly responsible for dispatch. The dispatch
method can, if
Damian just got finished his YAPC opening talk, and managed to allude
to dispatching and autoloading.
As it *appears* today, regular dispatching and multimethod dispatching
are going to be wired into the langauge (as appropriate). Runtime
dispatch behavior will continue to be supported,
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 01:26:22PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Multimethod dispatch?
Adam Turoff asked if multimethod dispatch (MMD) was really *the* Right
Thing (it's definitely *a* Right Thing) and suggested that it would be
more Perlish to allow the programmer to override
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 10:44:02PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
You must not be following Perl 6 closely enough, then. Perl 6 is a
real programming language now, as opposed to a scripting language.
Um, I've followed Perl6 closely enough to know that the distinction
between real langauge and
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:34:14AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
And I don't see what's stopping someone from writing Dispatch::Value.
use Dispatch::Value;
sub foo($param is value('param1')) {...}
sub foo($param is value('param2')) {...}
What it seems you're wanting is it to be in
Apologies if I've missed some earlier discussions on multimethods. The
apocolypses, exegesises and synopses don't seem to say much other than
(a) they will exist and (b) wait for apocolypse 12 for more information.
Looking over RFC 256[*] and Class::Multimethods[**] it sounds like the
intent is
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 09:19:36AM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
To what extent should the (presumably library-side) ability to parse a
given markup language influence Perl 6's core language design? (which
is what this list is nominally about.) I think this ought to
approximate to none at all.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 09:25:30PM -0500, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
Adam Turoff wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:21:51PM -0500, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
And what happens if a programmer wants to have two different
variables, of two different types, with the same name, such as @data
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 06:38:36PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
ML == Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ML Along those lines, the closest I've been able to come so far to a
ML usable two-sentence definition is:
ML -- A list is an ordered set of scalar values.
ML -- An array is
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:24:50AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 8:47 AM + 1/28/03, Piers Cawley wrote:
$ref[$key]
an array or hash look-up???
Decided at runtime?
How? People use strings as array indices and ints/floats as
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:16:50AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:55:56PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
I'm not a Lisp enthusiast, by and large, but I think he makes some
interesting observations on language design. Take a look if you're
feeling adventurous...
I can't
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 01:00:26PM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
The problem with cons/car/cdr is that they're fundemental operations.
Graham *has* learned from perl, and is receptive to the idea that
fundemental operators should be huffman encoded (lambda - fn). It
would be easy to simply
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:53:28PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
And in those rare cases where you really do need partial caching, the
simplest solution is to split the partially cached subroutine into a
fully cached sub and an uncached sub:
sub days_in_month(Str $month, Int $year)
{
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:58:11PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Adam Turoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It doesn't matter whether some of the values are cheap lookups
while other values are complex calculations. Once a cached sub
is called with a set of parameter values, the return value
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:58:11PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Adam Turoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you're trying to overoptimize something here. I can't see
a benefit to caching only sometimes. If there is, then you probably
want to implement a more sophisticated cache
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 02:20:01PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about the same way as one would do it now? Presumably we won't
all
forget how to program when Perl 6 comes out.
I think you've missed the point. The original poster (Smylers)
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 11:37:58AM -0800, David Whipp wrote:
I was reading the Partially Memorized Functions thread, and the thought
came to mind that what we really need, is to define a different
implementation of the method for a specific value of the arg. Something
like:
sub
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a little language
that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
other syntax, as:
foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
I'm wondering whether Perl
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 08:36:20PM -, Smylers wrote:
I was wondering whether it'd be better to have this specified per
Creturn rather than per Csub. That'd permit something a long the
lines of:
sub days_in_month(Str $month, Int $year)
{
}
Perhaps there are only some
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 01:40:59PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
The general Pro's and Con's of POD seem to be:
PRO
===
simple, concise, limited, extensible, forgiving
easy to convert to XXX, easy to write, easy to read, easy to ignore
separates block/inline markup, no special editor
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 03:50:34PM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
POD parsers also go to a fair amount of trouble to infer syntax. For
example, a function name like this() will be rendered differently by
many POD processors. This is a good thing, in that you don't have to
litter your
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 12:26:41PM -0300, Adriano Nagelschmidt Rodrigues wrote:
Luke Palmer writes:
Lisp is implemented in C, and C's macros are certainly not essential
to its functionality. But think of what macros in general provide:
* Multi-platform compatability
*
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 08:40:41PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
[...] I'm also trying to get a regular, if I'm
lucky every issue, Parrot/Perl 6 article in The Perl Review.
Speaking on behalf of TPR, the only bottleneck here is providing
a regular article/update on Parrot/Perl6 for each issue.
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 07:46:46PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
Proposal:
For background, revisit my proposed Bytecode Format (v2) at
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg05640.html.
Although it is outdated, is gives a general gist of the direction of my
thinking. In particular, pay no heed to the
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:32:32PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Right, but FORTH's not an interpreted language, generally speaking.
No, but PostScript is. :-)
(...as if that wasn't completely obvious...)
Z.
The beginnings of a Parrot FAQ can be found here:
http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html
It'll be moved to dev.perl.org shortly, when there's more meat to it.
Contents:
1 General Questions
1. What is Parrot?
2. Why Parrot?
3. Is Parrot the
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:20:46PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
Could the FAQ be made a
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:26:25PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
Expect another update tonight or tomorrow.
Here ya go. Same place as last time.
1 General Questions
1. What is Parrot?
2. Why Parrot?
3. Is Parrot the same thing as Perl6?
4
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 06:29:34PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
Whee! Ok. Some of these are
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:54:26PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:56:50PM +0100, Norbert Bollow wrote:
Could you please mention the DotGNU project also? We're also building,
among other things, a C# compiler and CLR runtime.
I could do, but DotGNU is, as you say,
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 08:31:00AM -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
Also, I thought Parrot was not stack-based If that is the case
then why does Overview.pod say this:
Registers will be stored in register frames, which can be pushed and
popped onto the register stack. For instance, a
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 01:20:42PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Monday 03 December 2001 12:31 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Terrence Brannon writes:
And then just write a RTL-JVM and RTL-CRL converter?
I think it's time to collet these questions into a FAQ. Any volunteers?
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 03:41:27AM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Some of you may remember (and some wish we could forget) a ramble I
posted about six months back about traffic lights and language design
and all the weird ways we get meaning out of such a small # of
symbols. One of the
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 12:48:54AM -0400, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
Okay, fun's over. Back to work.
There was a Perl Documentation BOF that was scheduled for 6:30 Friday;
however, it seems none of the folks who showed up actually called it, and
none of the folks who called it actually
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 02:08:58AM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
Uh, C++ virtual methods can be overloaded on a per-object basis, not
just a per-class basis, since the object drags around its virtual jump
table with it wherever it goes, so the jump can get compiled into
jump to the address
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 02:36:17PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Adam Turoff wrote:
Don't laugh. It's here now. It's called XSLT. :-)
Um, that's not what the article was talking about The proposal is to use
an XML syntax to program in existing VHLL languages, including
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 03:48:27PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
Why can't a general-purpose programming language be augmented with XML for
internal documentation purposes?
You mean like C#? :-)
Z.
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 01:37:36PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, ivan wrote:
http://www.ora.com/news/vhll_1299.html
Fascinating article, but his point about XML source code struck my funny
bone. I've certainly heard the argument before - most recently in Dr.
Dobbs
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 05:20:40PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's the trick, Solaris is Sun's Blessed Platform. As a
Linux/PowerPC user, I know how Ziggy feels. I'm almost totally
ignored by Sun and I'd imagine I'd have just as much trouble getting
it working as he did.
This is
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:18:07PM -0500, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
Adam Turoff [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*Nevertheless, a degenerate case for installing Perl never requires
*transfers or temporary disk space measured in quarter gigabytes.
Sure it can.
Allow me to clarify
What follows is a long, detailed summary of an attempt to install JDK 1.2.2
on FreeBSD today. FreeBSD/JDK 1.2.2 is an unsupported configuration for Sun,
although patches exist to get the JDK to work under FreeBSD.
Skip to the last two paragraphs if you want to see how this installation
compares
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:41:15PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Stephen P. Potter writes:
It seems to me that recently (the last two years or so) and
especially with 6, perl is no longer the SAs friend. It is no
longer a fun litle language that can be easily used to hack out
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:57:42AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
It doesn't look to me like the amount of Perl one needs to know to achieve
a given level of productivity is increasing in volume or complexity at
all. What it looks like to me is that there are additional features being
added
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:32:26PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
In that case, how exactly has it forgotten its roots? I mean, in what
way is it not as useful as it was before?
[Please forgive the following marketspeak]
The issue isn't that Perl is less useful now. It's that it's shifted
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 12:49:00PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
If you work in a team, then the bar is raised to the union (not the
intersection) of everyone's knowledge. But team programming is not
for small trivial tasks, and if you're solving large complex tasks
then it's unsurprising
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 05:23:01PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 09:20:13AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
So, I wonder aloud, do we want to signify that degree of change with a more
dramatic change in the name? Still Perl, but maybe Perl 7, Perl 10, Perl
2001, Perl NG,
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 02:58:50PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
* Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [05/10/2001 14:18]:
Perl 6 *will* provide a backwards compatible Perl 5 parser. The
details are not nailed down, but this definately will happen.
Damn straight. One way or another, perl 6
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:13:13PM -0700, David Goehrig wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:55:36AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
If you talk that way, people are going to start believing it.
[snip]
Some of us are are talking that way because we already
beleive it. You can't make
On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 03:31:56PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
So URLs are not
literals, they have structure, and only thinking of them as filenames
may be too simplistic.
Yeah. But Rebol manages to deal with them.
I doubt it. telephone:? fax:? lpp:?
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 08:25:17AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
I'm kinda puzzled by the focus on Schwartzian when I thought the GRT was
demonstrated to be better.
Because the insert name here transform is a specialized case
of the schwartzian transform where the default sort is sufficient.
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:50:09AM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
"SC" == Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SC Why can't Perl automagically do a Schwartzian when it sees a
SC comparison with complicated operators or functions on each side of
SC it? That is, @s = sort { f($a) = f($b) }
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:15:51PM -0500, John Porter wrote:
Adam Turoff wrote:
This message is not an RFC, nor is it an intent to add a feature
to Perl or specify a syntax for that feature[*].
Yay.
[...]
So you think
@s =
map { $_-[0] }
sort { $a-[1] = $b-[1
A very good non-programmer friend of mine just read yet another
discussion on the Schwartzian Transform, and had this to say:
So, having just plowed through more than I ever wanted to about
the Schwartzian Transform:
Is there some way to hard-code this into Perl6? Seems like it
would be
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:20:33PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
As much as I'd like to respond to some of these points, I'll refrain from it
now, I'll let my RFCs speak for themselves.
Ed,
The RFC process that we started this summer is formally and
intentionally closed. Your post,
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 01:41:22PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 04:04:31PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
1) The RFC was a free-for-all brainstorming process. Intentionally.
right, and your point is that brainstorming should cease(?)
Yes. Everyone (else) seems
On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 07:44:51PM +, David Mitchell wrote:
Also, if we go down the 'have a competition to see who can write the best
PDD on subject X' path, can we replace the 'TBD' in unnumbered PDDs
with a short string chosen by the author? This allows us to (hopefully)
unqiuely
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 04:58:11PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
What's the URL for the RFC archive?
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
Z.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 05:42:01PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 02:38 PM 2/20/2001 -0800, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
How should the submission process work? As for the RFC's?
Sounds good to me.
Any additional constraints on acceptance criteria? PDD 0 describes
an acceptable baseline on
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:58:03PM -0500, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
On Tuesday 20 February 2001 20:32, Adam Turoff wrote:
For example, I doubt that we want or need three competing PDDs on
Async I/O developing in the Standard track, but multiple PDDs on
the same topic would be welcome
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:42:31PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
What I seek is perl design documentation that allows someone to take the set
of PDD's and reimplement perl in another language.
What will aid Perl reimplementations are the PDDs. C-Centrism in the
PDDs is a moot point.
The
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:23:55PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
However, the JVM is a powerful environment for generalized bytecode and for
allowing bytecode of different languages to communicate.
So's Microsoft vaporware ".NET platform". And the second version
of that bytecoded runtime
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 07:56:21AM +, Alan Burlison wrote:
How are you going to publish the design? Asking people to follow email
discussions and try to piece together what is proposed from that doesn't
seem a very optimal way to go about it. How about a design document
(format to be
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 04:42:58PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 11:35:56AM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
All PDDs (like RFCs) need to start with 'Status: Developing' by default.
Since statuses like 'Standard', 'Rejected', etc. have Real Meaning (tm),
there should
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 05:59:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
6) Only a WG chair, pumpking, or one of the principals (i.e. Me, Nat, or
Larry, or our replacements) can mark a PDD as developing, standard, or
superceded.
This doesn't sound right.
All PDDs (like RFCs) need to start with
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:58:25PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
(Though I don't think we really need more than a few weeks to get a good
set of working RFCs for this, though of course they'll get amended and
expanded as work proceeds)
I'd like to see a revised set of RFC guidelines
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 10:55:29AM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
I don't see it.
I would find it extremely akward to allow
thread 1: *foo = \one_foo;
thread 2: *foo = \other_foo;
[...]
copy the foo body to a new location.
replace the old foo body
pecifically:
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:45:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Turoff)
Cc: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Threaded Perl bytecode (was: Re: stackles
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:33:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
as for ziggy's comments on the overload of builtins issue there could be
a simple dispatch table used instead of direct calls.
I don't think you understand the issue. That's taking great pains
to unthread threaded bytecode once
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:54:51AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
another TIL win is no compile phase and not even a bytecode intepreter
startup phase. TIL code is executed directly and the script is now a
true binary. reverse compilation is still easy due to the template
nature of the generated
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 11:03:12AM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
"AT" == Adam Turoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AT It would also mean that if anything was overriden anywhere, no
AT module code could be read in as bytecode, since it may need to be
AT rethreaded to incorporate overrid
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 08:59:21AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
Joshua N Pritikin writes:
: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/python/2000/10/04/stackless-intro.html
Perl 5 is already stackless in that sense, though we never implemented
continuations. The main impetus for going stackless was to
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 10:37:27PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
- The core team appeared to be doing too much, meddling in affairs
which didn't concern them.
http://www.freebsd.org/FAQ/misc.html#AEN4823
Q: Why should I care what color the bikeshed is?
A: The really, really short answer
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 06:53:47PM +1100, Jeremy Howard wrote:
Leon Brocard wrote:
Hmmm, I wonder what kind of subset would be necessary - surely the
most useful constructs are also the most complicated...
We could learn quite a bit by looking through the code from
Parse::RecDescent,
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 12:05:14AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 04:59:50PM -0400, Jorg Ziefle wrote:
Detailed information should follow soon. Should I write an RFC to
discuss about, though I would come a bit late? :(
RFC 313 not good enough for you? :)
I think
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 08:50:24AM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Bradley M. Kuhn writes:
It seems to me that the perl6-internals, perl6-qa, and perl6-licenses groups
should be able to produce additional RFCs after this. Of course, the
Language will be frozen, but these three groups may
The time for brainstorming about what Perl6 can/should be is coming
to a close. As Nat posted recently, we are now entering a two week
review period in anticipation of Larry's language design.
From this point forward, no new RFCs will be accepted until the RFC
submission process is reopened.
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:14:49PM -0500, David Grove wrote:
[...] I've no idea why Sarathy was deposed,
He wasn't.
but I have a
pretty big suspicion.
And a pretty big, well known problem with ActiveState.
The problem is, I love Sarathy too. He's a hero,
Yes, he's pretty heroic.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 07:56:49PM -0700, Daniel Chetlin wrote:
On Fri, Sep 29, 2000 at 12:56:44AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
Why isn't there a documentation w/g? Yes, this is a hint.
My RFC 240 garnered exactly 0 responses, so there doesn't seem to be
much of an interest. I was trying to
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 11:33:13AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Ziggy, are you interested in this idea enough (at all?) to stick a note
about the 'header' function into the RFC? Or should I RFC it separately?
Adding headers() to the core language (or a similar pragma that is
automagically
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 12:09:20PM -0400, James Mastros wrote:
Really, I don't see why we can't
just have a 'use taint' and 'no taint' pargma.
Because taint mode needs to be turned on REEELY early, like before
pragmas are compiled.
Z.
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 10:34:32AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which is what I'm working on. You'll all be extremely pleased to know, I'm
sure, that I have notes here for another 12 RFCs. After that, I have to start
thinking.
Three days to go to the
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 03:48:33AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
"PRL" == Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PRL -r freadable()
PRL -w fwriteable()
PRL -x fexecable()
PRL -o fowned()
PRL -R Freadable()
PRL -W Fwriteable()
PRL -X
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 08:50:28AM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
On 27 Sep 2000 09:16:10 +0300, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
Another option is to stuff the long names into some namespace, and
export them upon request (or maybe not export them, upon request).
Can you say "method"?
Doesn't work on
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 04:41:21AM -0400, Alan Gutierrez wrote:
Robust input parsing: yes.
General purpose output formatting: no, [...]
Rudimentary HTTP header emission: probably.
So this is the definition of first-class?
Have you read the RFC?
Have you read the
On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 02:56:20AM -0500, Curtis Jewell wrote:
Or would this tool be restricted to compile-time dependencies only?
I see no problem restricting dependency graphs to compile-time
dependencies.
Z.
I plan to offer a more formal RFC of this idea.
Z.
=item perl6storm #0022
make marshalling easy. core module? would this allow for easy
persistence of data structures other than dbm files?
general persistence is hard, right? can this be an attribute?
I plan to offer a more formal RFC of this idea.
Z.
=item perl6storm #0004
Need perl to spit out pod/non-pod, like cc -E. Pod is too hard to parse.
This would make catpod trivially implemented as a compiler filter.
I plan to offer a more formal RFC of this idea.
Z.
=item perl6storm #0025
Make -T the default when operating in a CGI env. That is, taintmode.
Will this kill us? Close to it. Tough. Insecurity through idiocy
is a problem. Make them *add* a switch to make it insecure, like
-U, if that's
I plan to offer a more formal RFC of this idea.
Z.
=item perl6storm #0026
Make CGI programming easier. Make as first class as
@ARGV and %ENV for CLI progging.
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
