At 3:42 PM -0500 12/11/03, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 03:05 PM 12/11/2003 -0500, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my $foo = Oracle::Instance::DEV1::db_block_buffers;
The namespace lookup in Oracle::Init checks the Oracle config
parameters which is external code.
All
On Dec 10, 2003, at 12:37 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
Dan Sugalski writes:
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
I don't like it either, but the
I think a heirarchy is a good idea for namespacing in general. I've
always wanted to be able to tie namespaces in Perl 5. It would only
make sense that if I tie Foo::, that Foo::anything:: would also go
through that tie to get the anything:: stash.
What do you mean by tie here? Are you talking
At 03:05 PM 12/11/2003 -0500, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my $foo = Oracle::Instance::DEV1::db_block_buffers;
The namespace lookup in Oracle::Init checks the Oracle config
parameters which is external code.
All sorts of neat possibilities. :)
It is truly
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my $foo = Oracle::Instance::DEV1::db_block_buffers;
The namespace lookup in Oracle::Init checks the Oracle config
parameters which is external code.
All sorts of neat possibilities. :)
It is truly remarkable the lengths that Perl programmers seem to
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 12:05, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
It is truly remarkable the lengths that Perl programmers seem to be
willing go to in order to hide a function call or obscure the existence
of an object. :)
Not all of the poly- and allomorphism in the world comes from
traditional object
On Dec 9, 2003, at 3:40 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:46 PM +0100 12/5/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the
Dan Sugalski writes:
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
I don't like it either, but the alternative is to impose an external
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 01:37:22AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
I think a heirarchy is a good idea for namespacing in general. I've
always wanted to be able to tie namespaces in Perl 5. It would only
make sense that if I tie Foo::, that Foo::anything:: would also go
through that tie to get
At 01:37 AM 12/10/2003 -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
Dan Sugalski writes:
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
I don't like it either, but
At 12:16 PM 12/10/2003 +, Tim Bunce wrote:
*{Foo\0Bar\0Baz}-{var};
or
*{Foo\0Bar\0Baz\0var};
[snip]
I think Dan was proposing the first and that's fine.
I think the second would be a mistake.
Using a character that won't collide with HLL has a disadvantage
in the general
Quoth Melvin Smith:
It be a bit friendlier to make the scope resolution operator something
that at least 1 or 2 languages use as their own already; then all the rest
still have to mangle.
Uh oh, time to vote?
At 11:34 AM 12/10/2003 -0600, Robert Eaglestone wrote:
Quoth Melvin Smith:
It be a bit friendlier to make the scope resolution operator something
^^ ACK
that at least 1 or 2 languages use as their own already; then all the rest
still have to mangle.
Uh oh, time to vote?
Voting for
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:26:04PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 12:16 PM 12/10/2003 +, Tim Bunce wrote:
*{Foo\0Bar\0Baz}-{var};
or
*{Foo\0Bar\0Baz\0var};
[snip]
I think Dan was proposing the first and that's fine.
I think the second would be a mistake.
Using a
At 5:46 PM +0100 12/5/03, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
Something about
I've checked in a bunch of object stuff mainly attributes and a first
try to call a method.
Some remarks:
newclass P1, Foo
addattrib I1, P1, i
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
Same
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
Something about this embedded \0 character
bugs me. I know its what Dan has in the design doc but
it just
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:14 PM 12/5/2003 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
set I2, P1[Foo\x00i] # I1 == I2
gets currently the attribute idx (0) of $Foo::i.
Q: Should the assembler mangle the Foo::i to Foo\0i
Something about this embedded \0 character
bugs me. I know its
18 matches
Mail list logo
