# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #17702]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17702
This patch stops parrot from permanently allocating increasing amounts
of
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #17703]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17703
Description of patch by chunks:
- remove outdated comment/ifdef
- use
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #17704]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17704
This patch corrects the reported parser error in imcc/samples.imc.
(After .eom,
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #17705]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17705
This patch corrects an old bug (cutpaste typos) in life.p6 and adds
stats of
The Perl 6 Summary for the Week Ending 20020929
Okay, this is my last summary before I take a couple of week's holiday
away from any form of connectivity. Will I cope? Can my system stand
going cold turkey? Can you live without my summaries?
Luckily, Leon Brocard has been
On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 15:24, Luke Palmer wrote:
Maybe I'm misundertanding the question, but I think you want negative
lookahead:
Perl 5: /(.*)(?!union)/
You really meant to say
Perl 5: /((?:(?!union).))*/
# Match characters that do not begin the word 'union'
Right?
Peter
On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 11:19 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 06:04:28PM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
On a slightly different note, if we have interfaces then I'd really
like to follow the Eiffel model: features such as renaming methods
in the derived class may
On Tuesday, October 1, 2002, at 02:49 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Which implies, I assume, that interface is not the default state of
a class method, e.g. we do need something like method foo() is
interface { ... } to declare any given method
Flippin' hell, never mind. You're almost
At 10:46 PM -0400 9/28/02, Erik Lechak wrote:
I would like to start helping in the development of parrot. I have
read the documentation, the design docs, and went over the source,
but I am still a little lost. I would eventually like to help with
the coding, but it appears that there may be
At 9:37 PM -0400 9/29/02, Mike Lambert wrote:
intlist is not the only culprit. ./classes/key.c and ./key.c have a
similar problem.
Then let's start a convention.
Classes start with a CL_ prefix, encodings with an EN_ prefix, and
character set stuff starts with a CS_ prefix.
--
On Sat 28 Sep 2002 02:23, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 12:33:05PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
In accordance to Schwern's How use strict got me a perl5porter, this
seems like How obfuscation got me on perl6-internals ...
s/Schwern/Merijn/
For
On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 05:23 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
OTOH, Java interfaces have a loophole which is considered a design
mistake.
An interface can declare some parts of the interface optional and then
implementors can decide if they want to implement it or not. The
I was wondering what the favored syntax in perl6 would be to match negative
multi-byte strings. In perl 5:
$sql = select * from a where b union select * from c where d;
my $nonunion = [^u]|u[^n]|un[^i]|uni[^o]|unio[^n];
my (subsqls) = ($sql =~ m((?:$nonunion)*);
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 11:51:02AM -0700, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
This comes down to an OO philosophy issue. If Perl 6 wants a strict OO
style, don't put in a loophole. If they want to leave some room to
play,
put in the ability to turn some of the strictness off.
I guess what bothers me
[Negative matching]
a generic negative, multi-byte string matching mechanism. Any thoughts?
Am I missing something already present or otherwise obvious?
Maybe I'm misundertanding the question, but I think you want negative
lookahead:
Perl 5: /(.*)(?!union)/
Perl 6: /(.*) !before:
In a message dated Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Michael G Schwern writes:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 06:04:28PM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
On a slightly different note, if we have interfaces then I'd really
like to follow the Eiffel model: features such as renaming methods
in the derived class may seem
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 01:24:45PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
[Negative matching]
a generic negative, multi-byte string matching mechanism. Any thoughts?
Am I missing something already present or otherwise obvious?
Maybe I'm misundertanding the question, but I think you want negative
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 12:47:24PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 01:24:45PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
[Negative matching]
a generic negative, multi-byte string matching mechanism. Any thoughts?
Am I missing something already present or otherwise obvious?
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 03:43:22PM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
You want something like
class Car is Vehicle renames(drive = accel)
is MP3_Player renames(drive = mp3_drive);
Either of those renamings is, of course, optional, in which case drive()
refers to the non-renamed one
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonathan Scott Duff) writes:
I think what you want is just a negated assertion:
/!'union'+/
Although I don't know what that means exactly.
That matches more than one thing that is not the string union.
u is not the string union; n is not the string union...
I
On Tuesday, October 1, 2002, at 12:33 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Perhaps a way to sharpen the focus on this is to expand the discusson
of
strictness to include not just method prototypes but Design-By-Contract
features as well (pre and post conditions and invariants). Should DBC
guaranteeing that the subsqls have all text up to, but not including the string
union.
I suppose I could say:
rule nonunion { (.*) :: { fail if ($1 =~ munion$); } }
What's wrong with: ?
rule getstuffbeforeunion { (.*?) union | (.*) }
a union = a
b = b
Am I missing something here?
David Whipp wrote:
$b = 7, 6, 5
b = 7, 6, 5
I understand that C's *interpretation* of the comma operator will be expunged from
Perl 6. But unless comma's *precedence* is also changing, neither of those statements
would build a list with three elements.
It seems to me that
$b = 7, 6,
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 03:43:22PM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
You want something like
class Car is Vehicle renames(drive = accel)
is MP3_Player renames(drive = mp3_drive);
I *really* like this, but would the above be better coded as:
class Car is Vehicle renames(drive
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
Andy Dougherty:
# More generally, though, rather than sprinkling the sources
# with INTVAL_FMT and other ugly (but correct and portable
# things), should we be trying to
# funnel everything through a central printf-like engine and
# have it
http://www.parrotcode.org/openpatches
There are a _lot_ of Pending patches.
Within a few weeks, I hope to have an automated email nudging about
this weekly.
-R
(801) [PATCH] PerlArray in scalar context Pending
(15345) [PATCH] Generating assemble.pl Pending
(15574) [PATCH] RECALL renamed
Andy Dougherty:
# *elbows him in the side and points at
# /Parrot_v?sn?printf(_[sc])?/ in
# misc.c*
#
# Interesting, yes, that's mostly what I had in mind, but I'm
# unsure just how it's intended to be used.[*] That is, if I have
#
# INTVAL iv = 7;
#
# what format do I use to print
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 06:32:07PM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
guaranteeing that the subsqls have all text up to, but not including the string
union.
I suppose I could say:
rule nonunion { (.*) :: { fail if ($1 =~ munion$); } }
What's wrong with: ?
rule getstuffbeforeunion {
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 05:24:43PM -0400, Peter Behroozi wrote:
On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 16:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
doesn't work (just tried it out, not sure why it doesn't) but even if it did,
it would be awful slow. It would try one character, look at the next for the
string union,
29 matches
Mail list logo
