"RP" == Richard Proctor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps $/ and $\ should become per-filehandle variables, and
there should be some way to set autochomp-on-read per filehandle,
and auto-newline-on-output per filehandle.
RP I can see a small benefit for autochomp-on-read but none
Does anyone EVER use chomp() except shortly after reading a line
of input from a stream? No?
Perhaps $/ and $\ should become per-filehandle variables, and
there should be some way to set autochomp-on-read per filehandle,
and auto-newline-on-output per filehandle.
Then, if anyone ever needs to
Today around 11:17am, Nathan Wiger hammered out this masterpiece:
: "Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
:
: Someone, (and I've lost who, exactly) was interested in taking those
: off my hands for a String::Utils module.
:
: I believe I volunteered for this; not sure if anyone else did, but I'm
: more
"Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
Someone, (and I've lost who, exactly) was interested in taking those
off my hands for a String::Utils module.
I believe I volunteered for this; not sure if anyone else did, but I'm
more than willing to do this.
-Nate
On Fri 08 Sep, Eric Roode wrote:
Does anyone EVER use chomp() except shortly after reading a line
of input from a stream? No?
Yes
Perhaps $/ and $\ should become per-filehandle variables, and
there should be some way to set autochomp-on-read per filehandle,
and auto-newline-on-output
Shoot chop. and chomp. Unless you add unchop and unchomp.
Cchomp *has* an inverse.
Surely you know about the unary postfix C.$/ operator?
Of course, you have to be careful. There's a known bug that
the C.$/ doesn't properly "unchomp" if you've ever used the
C$/=`` operator.
;-)
Damian
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 02:50:37AM +, Ed Mills wrote:
Shoot chop. and chomp. Unless you add unchop and unchomp. Parity issue. Like
a language with YES and no NO.
Just kill then both.
Although I'm rather fond of symmetry, it's not inherently good.
Rather boring if overused.
I admit to
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 06:39:38PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
=head1 TITLE
Retire chop().
Awww, does this mean we won't be seeing chip() and chimp() in Perl 6?
'Pends on whether you modulate them.
--tom
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 06:48:35PM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
Awww, does this mean we won't be seeing chip() and chimp() in Perl 6?
'Pends on whether you modulate them.
KCHP 1570 on your AM dial!
--
Michael G Schwern http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just
'Pends on whether you modulate them.
KCHP 1570 on your AM dial!
Aw, not *another* one of those easy-listening Californian motor cop stations!
Damian
On Thu, 07 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Awww, does this mean we won't be seeing chip() and chimp() in Perl 6?
Someone, (and I've lost who, exactly) was interested in taking those
off my hands for a String::Utils module.
I believe it was quite clear, however, that my
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 06:39:38PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
=head1 TITLE
Retire chop().
Awww, does this mean we won't be seeing chip() and chimp() in Perl 6?
--
Michael G Schwern http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just Another Stupid Consultant
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Retire chop().
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 5 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Version: 1
Number: 195
Status: Developing
=head1 ABSTRACT
Remove
13 matches
Mail list logo
