Not being a PDL'er myself, but interested in learning more about it and
making sure Perl 6 doesn't suck, I'd love to see a bulleted list of what
doesn't work right, even assuming that @arrays were made more flexible.
For example, if you could do this:
@c = @a * @b;
@c = @a + @b;
Peter Scott wrote:
Tony Olekshy wrote:
In fact, not only would I be pleased and honoured to author the
Perl 6 core Try.pm module, I'm already working on a Perl 5 standard
reference implementation.
Peter, I think we should make this approach more clear in RFC 88.
I'm not
On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 08:24:19PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
This is an interesting idea. I would think that ideally it would be
combined with pre-declared limited keyspace hashes (which we currently
have in a semi-crippled way with pseudohashes).
This seems like a fairly orthagonal thing
If =~ allowed "indirect object" notation as - does, then we could write
s $str (pat){rep};
and
for ( grok %db /Name/$name/g ) {
Yeah, but I'm not sure what those are supposed to do. They look way too
obscure for me.
As written I don't see an advantage in the RFC. I think
On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:44:32 -0400, John Porter wrote:
Nathan Wiger wrote:
I do think
it's worth considering if we're dead-set on losing =~.
But are we?
I hope not. I *like* the =~ syntax, and I would hope we could extend it
to more functions that change one of their parameters, like
=head1 TITLE
Global time should be made available
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Suresh Kumar .R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2000-08-26
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: ?
=head1 ABSTRACT
A builtin function should which returns appropriate time according
to the that
=head1 TITLE
Subscript should be known for a multidimesional array
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Suresh Kumar .R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2000-08-26
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: ?
=head1 ABSTRACT
When we use $ARGV[$#ARGV] it gives the Subscript of the last element
=head1 TITLE
Builtin function to insert an element in the middle of the array (including
multidimensional)
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Suresh Kumar .R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2000-08-26
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: ?
=head1 ABSTRACT
A builtin function should be
=head1 TITLE
Perl should become PEARL
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Suresh Kumar .R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2000-08-26
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: ?
=head1 ABSTRACT
Perl should become PEARL which indicates the true meaning for
this language
=head1 DESCRIPTION
=head1 TITLE
Subscript should be known for a multidimesional array
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Suresh Kumar .R [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2000-08-26
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: ?
=head1 ABSTRACT
When we use $ARGV[$#ARGV] it gives the Subscript of the last element
Sumesh,
Please read http://dev.perl.org/ for the correct way to post a Perl 6
RFC. The first thing you need to know is that they should go to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], not direct to the mailing list.
Secondly, you need to make sure that things your'e RFCing aren't already
available in Perl. Some of
[I know this is not your quote, but your quotee's quote]
There is obviously no need to modify the behavior of the C operator.
Is one wholly certain of this?
DB1 @c = (1..3)
DB2 @a = @b @c
DB3 x @a
0 0
DB4 x @b
empty array
It's hard to argue that @a now
Suresh Kumar R writes:
: Perl should become PEARL
Er, the folks at http://www.irt.uni-hannover.de/pearl/pearl-gb.html
might have something to say about that.
Larry
Tom Christiansen writes:
: It would appear that altering /|| on LHS context would entail,
: in the list assignment scenario, calling that operand in list context
: and then deciding whether it were true or not by some "intuitive"
: means (almost certainly by using whether its element count were
:
Bart Lateur writes:
: Apropos those extended mechanisms: couldn't we use the same mechanism as
: is currently in use for $!, for $@ too? I mean: $! in numerical context
: gives an error number, in string context a text string. Then
:
: die "I'm outta here: $!";
:
: should assign both the
Perl should become PEARL
This is a joke, right? :-)
Perl already *was* PEARL. Way back when. Larry changed it *to* Perl
because there was already a different PEARL.
Even many books display PEARL as the Logo for the PERL
language book.
Maybe they're really talking about PEARL. If not, I
At 02:22 PM 8/26/00 +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
It seems that it ought to be possible to evaluate something in a list
context and test whether there are any entries in the resulting list
without having to reevaluate the expression in a scalar context. The
work-around with the trinary
17 matches
Mail list logo
