On 05/12/02 02:45 -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going to ask something that's probably going to launch off into a long,
silly thread. But I'm really curious what the results will be so I'll ask
it anyway. Think of it as an experiment.
So here's your essay topic:
Explain how having
Joseph F. Ryan:
# Why? Isn't the pretty form more generally useful?
#
#
# I don't think so; I'd think it to be annoying to have type
# more code in order to specify a more cocise form; if I need
# to dump a structure, I'd prefer to do it manually.
I think it's useful to be able to say
Brent Dax wrote
To tell you the truth, I don't consider arrayrefs references anymore.
They're just Array objects that don't happen to be in @whatever symbols.
I don't know if this is the official view, but that fits my brain
better.
So you're saying that classes should stringify to a
On 12/05/2002 12:18 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 02:11 AM, James Mastros wrote:
On 12/04/2002 3:21 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
\x and \o are then just shortcuts.
Can we please also have \0 as a shortcut for \0x0?
\0 in addition to \x, meaning the same thing? I
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
The selector block/closure would, naturally, be called in Cint context
each time, so (again, as Larry pointed out) a boolean function would
naturally classify into two arrays. Though it might at first be a little
counterintuitive to have to write:
OK,
Is it clear how attributes accessors on objects are going to work yet?
I need to say something along the lines of:
sub new {
my $class = shift;
my ($name, $age) = @_;
bless {
name = $name,
age = $age
}, $class;
}
sub age { my $self=shift;
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 06 Dec 2002 14:54:43 +
Organization: Bethnal Green is PEOPLE!
X-Posted-By: 217.204.174.162
Is it clear how attributes accessors on objects are going to work
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 09:33:14AM -0500, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
For example, suppose I want to separate a list of people into people who
have never donated money and those who have. Assuming that each person
object has a donations property which is an array reference, I would want
to
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
What's wrong with single quoted here-docs?
What's wrong is that the documentation team is trying to allow \qq[]
there too, contradicting their own assertion that backslashes are not
special in that context.
Don't forget that the backslash is already
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 04:28 AM, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Brent Dax wrote
To tell you the truth, I don't consider arrayrefs references anymore.
They're just Array objects that don't happen to be in @whatever
symbols.
I don't know if this is the official view, but that fits my brain
Joseph F. Ryan:
# Brent Dax wrote
#
# To tell you the truth, I don't consider arrayrefs references
# anymore.
# They're just Array objects that don't happen to be in @whatever
# symbols. I don't know if this is the official view, but that fits my
# brain better.
#
#
# So you're saying that
On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 07:55 PM, Damian Conway wrote:
equally. The built-in would actually be doing classification of the
elements of the list, so it ought to be called Cclassify.
I worry that Cclassify sounds too much like something class-related,
and would confuse people. What
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 01:28 AM, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Array(0x1245AB)
Personally, I like this format. It's succinct, informative, and tells
you enough to do identity testing.
I like it too, but I thought everyone else hated it :)
I think people like it fine, but many people
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
I worry that C sounds too much like something class-related,
and would confuse people. What about C or something? Decent
thesaurus entries for include:
assign, classify, comb, compartmentalize, discriminate, distribute,
group, order, segregate, sift, winnow, amputate,
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 08:44:23AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
: Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: From: Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Date: 06 Dec 2002 14:54:43 +
: Organization: Bethnal Green is PEOPLE!
: X-Posted-By: 217.204.174.162
:
Michael said:
I worry that Cclassify sounds too much like
something class-related
'Classify' also seems wrong if some items are
thrown away. I like 'part':
(@foo,@bar) := part { ... } @source;
Headed off in another direction, having a sub
distribute its results like this reminds me of:
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:15:20 -0800
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As for constructor syntax, I suppose we might make use of the $. notation
like this:
method new($.name, $.age) {
return $class.bless;
}
Come to think of it, new is a class method, not an object
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 12:27:31PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:15:20 -0800
: From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
: As for constructor syntax, I suppose we might make use of the $. notation
: like this:
:
: method new($.name, $.age) {
: return
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:16:20 -0700 (MST)
From: John Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2) requiring balanced delimiters to be escaped,
PRO: it's consistent with non-balanced delimiter requirements
CON: you already can; don't force it those who don't want it
I'll say no, agreeing with the
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 10:40:18AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: If an aggregate and a reference to an aggregate are going to behave
: the same, which is what Larry's indicated in the past, then
: stringifying a reference should be the same as stringifying its
: referent.
This is a bit of an
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 10:16:20AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
: On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
:
: What's wrong with single quoted here-docs?
:
: What's wrong is that the documentation team is trying to allow \qq[]
: there too, contradicting their own assertion that backslashes are
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
Answer 1: Ignoring legacy, it won't.
Answer 2: Because C uses 0-based indexes, Parrot is written in C,
2002-12-05 10:45:39, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to ask something that's probably going to launch off into a
long, silly thread. But I'm really curious what the results will be so
I'll ask it anyway. Think of it as an experiment.
So here's your essay topic:
On 5 Dec 2002, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
John Williams wrote in perl.perl6.language :
If you want good'ol Unix flavor, call it vrep. Compare the ed(1) /
ex(1) / vi(1) commands (where 're' stands for regular expression, of
course) :
:g/re/p
:v/re/p
Or, to follow the spirit rather
=head1 Perl 6 and Set Theory
This document will introduce a new way of thinking about some Perl 6
constructs. In addition, it proposes some minor changes that would
help this way of thinking be more consistent. These changes may make
Perl 6 a better language in general, as a side effect.
Even
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 01:28 AM, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Array(0x1245AB)
Personally, I like this format. It's succinct, informative, and tells
you enough to do identity testing.
I like it too, but I thought everyone else hated it :)
I
This is a bit of an oversimplification. $foo and @foo do not always
behave the same, even if $foo and @foo refer to the same array object.
In particular, $foo doesn't behave like @foo in a list context.
Scalars must continue to behave like scalars in list context, even
if they're internally
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 01:08 PM, Piers Cawley wrote:
He notes that VisualWorks Smalltalk makes the distinction between
'displayString', for the user oriented stringification and
'printString', for the programmer oriented.
One could imagine a scenario in which a user could accomplish
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 03:24:44PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
Larry was certainly in favour of it when he wrote A5
(see under http://search.cpan.org/perl6/apo/A05.pod#Backslash_Reform).
Except the separators he suggests are semicolons:
Perl 5 Perl 6
\x0a\x0d
On 12/6/02 4:41 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
my PersonName $name = .new(...);
my FormalStr $s = $name;# Dr. William P. Smith
my InformalStr $s = $name;# Bill
Whether that is good, bad, or indifferent I leave to the OO Police.
I'm not even deputized, but I call foul: excessive use
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
On 5 Dec 2002, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
John Williams wrote in perl.perl6.language :
If you want good'ol Unix flavor, call it vrep. Compare the ed(1) /
ex(1) / vi(1) commands (where 're' stands for regular expression, of
course) :
:g/re/p
Damien Neil wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
Answer 1: Ignoring legacy, it won't.
Bingo.
Answer 2: Because C uses 0-based
Sean O'Rourke writes:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
how 'bout tang for Tog's A Negated Grep?
Gah. s/Tog/Tang/.
Wouldn't that mean we had to rename grep to 'gnat'? (Gnat's Not A Tang,
presumably, never mind rot13 and reversal...)
--
Aaron Crane * GBdirect Ltd.
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: I'm going to ask something that's probably going to launch off into a long,
: silly thread. But I'm really curious what the results will be so I'll ask
: it anyway. Think of it as an experiment.
:
: So here's your essay topic:
Larry wrote:
: Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
: will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
How about, because I like it? You may, of course, see that as a
legacy argument, depending on our relative ages... :-)
A practical argument in its
Nicholas Clark mused:
I just had this thought - can I interpolate in there?
Something like
\c[$(call_a_func())]
Why not just:
$(chr call_a_func()]
???
Damian
Dave Whipp wrote:
I notice everyone still want Int context for eval of the block:
Pease don't forget about hashes. Is there such a thing as
'hashkey context'?
I doubt it. Unless you count Str context.
Perl6 is much better than Perl5 for naming parameters. Could
we make the following work?
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
How would you do something like:
(@foo,@bar,@zap) := classify { /foo/ ;; /bar/ ;; /zap/ } @source;
Since I don't understand what that's supposed to do, I probably *wouldn't*
do something like it. What effect are you trying to achieve?
Damian
Damian Conway:
# Also, can I return superpositions (sorry, junctions), to provide
# multiple classifications? Or would I return an array for that?
#
# A (dis)junction ought to work there.
That sounds horribly scary...
--Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@roles=map {Parrot $_} qw(embedding regexen
DC == Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DC A practical argument in its favour is that it makes
DC circular-lists-via-modulo:
DC @list[++nextidx%7] = $nextval;
DC $day_name = Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat[$day%7];
DC both work correctly.
not to defend 1 based arrays but all
40 matches
Mail list logo
