Chris Dutton wrote:
So many operators...
Well, this seems a good as time as any to jump in with what's been
sticking in my brain for a while now. Last June, Simon C. wrote a
little philosophical thing, Half measures all around, which generated
the appropriate amount of good discussion. I want
Deborah Pickett wrote:
Which looks better?
if ($a == 1|2|3 || $b eq x|y|z)
or
if ($a == 1||2||3 | $b eq x||y||z
?
No question thatthe former works better. Lower precedence operators govern
larger chunks, and so should themselves be larger (i.e. more easily detected).
I just need some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
| ! - superpositional
all any one (none?)
I don't understand this, on several levels. The lowest level on which
I don't understand it is that testing whether an array is full of threes:
@array 3
makes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
But our version of understandable still means a steep, steep learning
curve.
It's worse than that; for practitioners of many languages, the learning
curve has a 180 degree turn.
Quick: what are the bitwise operators in Java, JavaScript, C, C++, C#,
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So lets have _lots_ of operators, and _lots_ of two-to-four-letter
barewords, so long as they each do something Big, or something
Universal. And let's locale-ize them, so that non-english-speakers can
use 'umu' to mean 'bool', etc. Hey, why the
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
But our version of understandable still means a steep, steep learning
curve.
It's worse than that; for practitioners of many languages, the learning
curve has a 180 degree turn.
Quick: what are the bitwise
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Piers Cawley) writes:
It rather depends on how common the Superposition operators turn out
to be doesn't it?
No. No, it doesn't.
--
ZenHam heh, yeah, but Aretha could be reading out /etc/services and
kick just so much ass :)
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 04:10:31PM -0700, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Here's try #2. Things that are not true operators or have other
caveats are marked, where known. LMKA.
methods and listops, uncategorized:
my our
map grep
sqrtlogsin cos tan
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 01:59:46AM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 06:28:28PM -0400, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: ? - force to bool context
: ! - force to bool context, negate
: + - force to numeric context
:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 10:33:04AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Brent Dax wrote:
Which would create a superposition of all strings besides the given one,
right? (Oh crap, I think I gave Damian an idea... :^) )
H. Maybe Cnone is starting to grow on me. Bwah-ha-ha-ha-hah! ;-)
I'm worried.
Simon Cozens wrote:
I don't understand this, on several levels. The lowest level on which
I don't understand it is that testing whether an array is full of threes:
array 3
Err...that's not what that does. What you wrote creates a scalar value that
superimposes the scalar values C
If memory serves me right, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The changes are 99.9% internal - all (parrot + perl6) tests are running
during these changes.
Hmm... a .pbc I assembled last week refused to run today ... which was
really surprising for me ..
`PackFile_unpack: Bytecode not valid for this
At 8:46 AM -0700 10/26/02, Ramesh Ananthakrishnan wrote:
Well S12 does not Concatenate. I tried it a
million other times. If S12 is or or 0 it does
not concatenate but just stores hi once.
Right version of Parrot, so is this a bug? I hunted
round the bugdatabase for some time, but
At 10:22 PM 10/26/2002 +0530, Gopal V wrote:
If memory serves me right, Ramesh Ananthakrishnan wrote:
I have this code
set S12
set I0 0
WHILE:
concat S12 hi
add I0 1
lt I0 10 WHILE
print S12
ret
...
Right version of Parrot, so is this a bug?
I have this code
set S12
set I0 0
WHILE:
concat S12 hi
add I0 1
lt I0 10 WHILE
print S12
ret
Well S12 does not Concatenate. I tried it a
million other times. If S12 is or or 0 it does
not concatenate but just stores hi once.
Right version of Parrot, so
At 08:46 AM 10/26/2002 -0700, Ramesh Ananthakrishnan wrote:
I have this code
set S12
set I0 0
WHILE:
concat S12 hi
add I0 1
lt I0 10 WHILE
print S12
ret
Well S12 does not Concatenate. I tried it a
million other times. If S12 is or or 0 it does
not
At 08:07 PM 8/21/2002 +0100, Ximon Eighteen wrote:
You _would_ think so, wouldn't you? :)
Personally I've been a little disappointed
in the involvement(interest) of late.
-Melvin
I wonder how many interested observers of this list there are like myself. I
only wish I had the time
At 1:01 PM +0100 10/25/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:16:55PM -0400, Jason Gloudon wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 04:47:05PM -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote:
It shouldn't at all. It does the check once, when parrot starts up.
It will. If you read the following paragraph I
At 1:18 PM +0200 10/26/02, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The default chartype (e.g. for string constants in PBC) is currently
unicode with utf32 encoding.
Can someone comment on this?
In some debug sessions I saw a lot of string_compare -
string_transcode cased by this default.
We should probe and
I committed a new multiarray.pmc, now based on list.c. It's not totally
finished yet (the clone codes needs some polishing to call the init_pmc
method) and needs a lot more tests.
But I hate failing tests ...
leo
During chasing the GC bugs one of my patches turned off DOD/GC in
string_transcode (which is called from e.g string_compare).
There is no need to keep this as the GC issues seem to be solved now.
OTOH e.g. hash.c could profit from the current status, because, when
The default chartype (e.g. for string constants in PBC) is currently
unicode with utf32 encoding.
Can someone comment on this?
In some debug sessions I saw a lot of string_compare - string_transcode
cased by this default.
leo
--- parrot/include/parrot/chartype.hWed Jun 26 03:00:03 2002
If memory serves me right, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Huh? No, you misunderstand. Each chunk of the bytecode has a separate
TOC for stuff like this. The full identifier would be
file/chunk/entry, which should be reasonably guaranteed to be unique.
When the compiler's emitting code to reference a
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 01:13:12PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I committed a new multiarray.pmc, now based on list.c. It's not totally
finished yet (the clone codes needs some polishing to call the init_pmc
method) and needs a lot more tests.
But I hate failing tests ...
Make the tests
If memory serves me right, Ramesh Ananthakrishnan wrote:
I have this code
set S12
set I0 0
WHILE:
concat S12 hi
add I0 1
lt I0 10 WHILE
print S12
ret
...
Right version of Parrot, so is this a bug?
I get
No entries on stack!
Hi All,
We've been thinking long and hard about Parrot and found that
the spec viz packfile versions , code segmentations, opcodes and
virtually everything is changing minute to minute ...
So we think it might do good to have a Parrot-dev'r do the
co-ordination duties . What I
Folks,
On Tuesday I'm going to go through and get the copyright notices and
license stuff sorted out. This includes setting everything to be
copyright YAS, and the license info (if any) in the individual files
that are part of the core to get yanked in deference to the global
license.
If
Gopal V wrote:
Hi All,
We've been thinking long and hard about Parrot and found that
the spec viz packfile versions , code segmentations, opcodes and
virtually everything is changing minute to minute ...
No specs are changing currently, but there is some discussion, how to
continue, how to
Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 01:13:12PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
I committed a new multiarray.pmc, now based on list.c. It's not totally
finished yet (the clone codes needs some polishing to call the init_pmc
method) and needs a lot more tests.
But I hate failing tests
Clinton A. Pierce wrote:
At 08:46 AM 10/26/2002 -0700, Ramesh Ananthakrishnan wrote:
I have this code
set S12
set I0 0
WHILE:
concat S12 hi
add I0 1
lt I0 10 WHILE
print S12
ret
Well S12 does not Concatenate.
The example seems to run fine here.
All --
Its been quite some time since I did any committing, so I figured I post
this for comment
rather than just commit it. Without objection, I'll commit.
This patch makes the code and documentation for the program match, removes
dead
code, and slightly improves (IMHO) the way the program
# New Ticket Created by Jürgen Bömmels
# Please include the string: [perl #18097]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=18097
When using Parrot_sprintf* functions without an interpreter, you get
segfaults.
# New Ticket Created by Jürgen Bömmels
# Please include the string: [perl #18098]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=18098
Some of the flags Parrot_sprintf functions don't work in the same way
as the
I think it would be cool if there were a way to pull the arguments out
to the front, because then we really could write in Japanese word order:
args wa $*OUT de print yo!
: also , is here the following DWIMmery in place
:
: sub pairs ( $x,$y ){ $x = $y } ;
: sub triples (
Larry wrote:
If one were going to generalize that, one would be tempted to go the Ada
route of specifying the radix explicitly:
0123# decimal
2:0110 # binary
8:123 # octal
16:123 # hex
256:192.168.1.0 # base 256
Will Perl6 have labeled if blocks? Like this:
BLAH:
if ($foo) {
...
last BLAH if $bar;
...
}
_
Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
_ as space eating grammar rule .
just beautifull!
this is in harmony with
$x = 123_567 ;
and we can use it as explicite space
$x =_$a++_+_++$a ;
or even as separator in *ugly* looking operators
x ^_~~ s/.../.../
arcadi
On 10/26/02 7:24 PM, Simon Cozens wrote:
To the innocent bystanders, I hope you're not buying any of this crap
about Perl 6 being more regular or removing the inconsistencies of
Perl 5. It simply isn't true.
I was buying that right up until about a week or two ago when Larry emerged
from his
but what about placeholders ?
arcadi .
On 10/26/02 8:18 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
On 27 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: To the innocent bystanders,
I'm afraid you're preaching to the null set here. :-)
I don't know whether to be flattered that you think I'm not just a
bystander, or insulted that you think I'm not innocent ;)
-John
Smylers wrote:
This is only objecting to having English operators as synonyms for
symbolic ones. None of the above would apply if where English forms
were used they were to be the _only_ forms, with no symbolic
equivalents.
Yes, I think we're basically saying the same thing, but in different
Damian Conway wrote:
~~ !~ - smartmatch and/or perl5 '=~' (?)
like unlike- (tentative names)
Do we *really* need the alphabetic synonyms here?
Me no like!
I agree with Damian. Clike wouldn't've been a bad name for the Perl 5
C=~ operator;
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 09:16:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We're also missing the actual C operators that are guaranteed to return 0 or 1:
$x ? $y # C's $x $y
$x ?| $y # C's $x || $y
$x ?! $y # C's, er, !!$x ^ !!$y
And we need those... why? Wouldn't:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 09:23:19PM -, Smylers wrote:
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Here's my own argument for using like/unlike, and none, and a
bunch of other english-sounding things we haven't even talked about
yet.
... I don't think we've put much of a dent in the readability
You know, \ and friends as xor is appealing to me.
There's no problem with \\ or \=, so that works. It's got nothing to
do with references, but unary | has nothing to do with anything.
Plus, it's parallel (er, perpendicular) to // as err, being logical
and all.
Just to clarify:
\
Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 09:23:19PM -, Smylers wrote:
I believe that having English aliases would make matters worse.
I agree, in general. I was planning on writing something about this.
Now I don't have to :-)
Pleased to be of help!
The only thing I would add,
: my attrs = qw{ name type breed }
: my Pet list=qw{
:fido dog collie
:fluffy cat siamese
: } ~~ sub (x) { map { _ = _ } attrs x Inf ^, x }
:~~ sub (x) { map { { _ , _ , _ } } x ;
by the way , ~~ seems to work like unix |
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
: $union{a} # A | ant
Of course, the interesting question at this point is what
$union{a} = axiomatic;
does if there's more than one hash in the superposition.
Larry
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
: Larry mused:
:
:
: Now I'm wondering whether these should be split into:
:
: ++|+! - bitwise operations on int
: += +|= +!=
:
: ~~|~! - bitwise operations on str
: ~= ~|=
On 26 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
: But our version of understandable still means a steep, steep learning
: curve.
:
: It's worse than that; for practitioners of many languages, the learning
: curve has a 180 degree turn.
:
: Quick: what are the
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Questions :
* are stream separators ; | in the for loop - operators
in the usual sence ( like , ) or they are pure grammar ?
* is prototype of the subrotine more regexp then expression ?
to what extent it is a regexp ? where it is stored , can we inspect it
Larry Wall wrote:
: Now I'm wondering whether these should be split into:
:
: ++|+! - bitwise operations on int
: += +|= +!=
:
: ~~|~! - bitwise operations on str
: ~= ~|= ~!=
Well, wait, these might have some
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, fearcadi wrote:
: * are stream separators ; | in the for loop - operators
: in the usual sence ( like , ) or they are pure grammar ?
If ;, probably operator, though behaving a bit differently on
the left of - than on the right, since the right is essentially
a signature.
In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
my Pet @list = qm : name type breed {
fido dog collie
fluffy cat siamese
};
That's still a lot easier to type than some of the alternatives I've
had to do for larger structures.
why ?
my @attrs=qw{ name type breed } ;
At 9:54 AM -0700 10/25/02, Larry Wall wrote:
Suppose you have a system in which all farm animals are classified
into the same category, and distinguished by one letter in their
name. All farm animals begin with, say, snarfu. So we get: ...
A similar problem exists with street names. Some
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:57:01 -0700
: From: Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: To: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Cc: Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED],
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: Re: Perl6 Operator List
:
: Larry Wall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damian Conway) writes:
Err...that's not what that does. What you wrote creates a scalar value that
superimposes the scalar values C \@array and C 3 .
To test if an array is full of 3's you'd write:
all(@array) == 3
Ah, I see. So (x y) is equivalent to all(x,y) ?
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 11:24:23AM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 01:59:46AM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 06:28:28PM -0400, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: ? - force to bool context
: ! - force to
In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
my Pet @list = qm : name type breed {
fido dog collie
fluffy cat siamese
};
That's still a lot easier to type than some of the alternatives I've
had to do for larger structures.
on the second thought :
my @attrs= ;
my Pet
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
: I suspect disjunctive superpositions will get a great deal
: of use as sets, and so the ability to add an element to an
: existing set:
:
: $set |= $new_element;
:
: might be appreciated. But it's no big thing.
Or maybe it is a big thing.
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, fearcadi wrote:
: In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
:
: my Pet @list = qm : name type breed {
: fido dog collie
: fluffy cat siamese
: };
:
: That's still a lot easier to type than some of the alternatives I've
: had to do for larger
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Here's my own argument for using like/unlike, and none, and a
bunch of other english-sounding things we haven't even talked about
yet.
... I don't think we've put much of a dent in the readability
complaints ... I think we need to care about these concerns a _lot_
Luke Palmer wrote:
You know, \ and friends as xor is appealing to me.
H. I quite like that too. :-)
Also, a question about superpositions: Is
$x = 1 | 2 | 3
equivalent to
$x = 1 | 2
$x |= 3
No. The precedence is wrong.
or
$x = (1 | 2) | 3
Yes.
or is there a
fearcadi wrote:
* do we have have an axcess to the signature of the
subroutine if we have been passed only its reference .
that is , for exemple , can
process( x , step )
guess how many arguments step expects ?
I'd expect that Code objects would have a Csignature or Csig method:
Larry wrote:
And you get the C || and for free
Yeah, but it's the same sense of free in which spam is free.
You pay for it in other ways.
But distinguishing int ops from str ops fixes the really nasty rule
in Perl 5 that says If this value (these values) has (have) ever
been used in a
On 26 Oct 2002, Smylers wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: I'm thinking we need a rule that says you can't put a space before a
: dereferencing (...),
:
: I'm concerned that making this sensitive to whitespace doesn't simplify
: things.
:
: print(length $a), \n;
: print (length $a), \n;
:
Larry Wall writes:
sub term:qa (str $quotestr) is parsed /qaquotestr/ { ... }
Michael Lazzaro writes :
my Pet list = qm : name type breed {
fido dog collie
fluffy cat siamese
};
doesnt it have to be
my Pet list = qm name type breed : { ... } ;
?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
: Distinguishing them sounds scary, much scarier than having C$a _ 1
: being different from C$a_1.
But we already have exactly the same distinction with
$foo{ $bar }
$foo { $bar }
not to mention
$a ?? $foo::bar
$a ?? $foo ::
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
: Luke Palmer wrote:
:
: You know, \ and friends as xor is appealing to me.
:
: H. I quite like that too. :-)
Except what about unary xor, i.e. 1's complement?
Besides, Windows programmers would continually be writing
$a / $b
and wonder why
Larry wrote:
: H. I quite like that too. :-)
Except what about unary xor, i.e. 1's complement?
I was carefully ignoring that. ;-)
Besides, Windows programmers would continually be writing
$a / $b
and wonder why they don't get one($a,$b);
grin
: Also, a question about
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: : my @attrs = qw{ name type breed }
: : my Pet @list=qw{
: :fido dog collie
: :fluffy cat siamese
: : } ~~ sub (@x) { map { _ = _ } @attrs x Inf ^, @x }
: :~~ sub (@x) { map { {
On 27 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
: : Distinguishing them sounds scary, much scarier than having C$a _ 1
: : being different from C$a_1.
:
: But we already have exactly the same distinction with
:
: $foo{ $bar }
: $foo { $bar }
:
: not
John Siracusa wrote:
Larry's just thinking out loud, right?
Yes, and so is everyone else. Most posts here, including Larry's, are
stream-of-conciousness. Heck, in one of the last ones I swear there
were, what, 6 or 7 possible ways to say the same binary op things.
90% of everything proposed
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Steve Canfield wrote:
: Will Perl6 have labeled if blocks? Like this:
:
: BLAH:
: if ($foo) {
: ...
: last BLAH if $bar;
: ...
: }
I don't see why we need it offhand. But we might well have something
that returns out of the innermost {...} anyway, so
Larry Wall:
# Besides, Windows programmers would continually be writing
#
# $a / $b
*rolls eyes*
(Yes, I know that's a joke. (It is, isn't it? :^) ))
--Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED], Windows Perl and Parrot hacker
@roles=map {Parrot $_} qw(embedding regexen Configure)
Wire telegraph is a
75 matches
Mail list logo
