On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:44:15PM -0500, Joe Gottman wrote:
In Perl 6, how will it be possible to iterate through two arrays at the
same time? According to Apocalypse 4, the syntax is
for @a; @b - $a; $b {
According to the book Perl 6 Essentials the syntax is
for zip(@a, @b)
Hi,
I don't remember anything about enums and bitenums in the
apocalypses. This is probably not very difficult to roll out
something using macros but I feel that should belong to the
standard language.
--
stef
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 02:48:06PM +0100, Stéphane Payrard wrote:
: Hi,
:
: I don't remember anything about enums and bitenums in the
: apocalypses. This is probably not very difficult to roll out
: something using macros but I feel that should belong to the
: standard language.
[Warning:
On Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 10:04 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
Explicitly:
$bar.does(Color)# does $bar know how to be a Color?
$bar.as(Color) # always cast to Color
Implicitly boolean:
$bar ~~ Color # $bar.does(Color)
?$bar.Color # $bar.does(Color)
if
Larry Wall writes:
Anyway, this all implies that use of a role as a method name defaults to
returning whether the type in question matches the subtype. That is,
when you say
$foo.true
it's asking whether the Boolean property fulfills the true constraint.
When you say
$bar.red
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 02:01:17PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: So Cas would be for casting, not coercion, right?
:
: Suppose you have a class Foo, such that:
:
: class Foo does (Bar, Baz) {
: ...
: }
:
: ... or however that looks. May I then presume that
:
: $foo.Bar.zap
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 04:18:19PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: Anyway, this all implies that use of a role as a method name defaults to
: returning whether the type in question matches the subtype. That is,
: when you say
:
: $foo.true
:
: it's asking whether the
LW == Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or are you worried that these have to be declared at all? I think
we need to declare them or we can't use them as bare identifiers.
There are no barewords in Perl 6, so they have to be something
predeclared, or otherwise syntactically
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 04:18:19PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: Anyway, this all implies that use of a role as a method name defaults to
: returning whether the type in question matches the subtype. That is,
: when you say
:
: $foo.true
:
: it's asking whether the
I'm invoking the principle that the only stupid question is the one not
asked:
Larry Wall wrote:
if indeed properties can be unified with roles (and roles with
classes).
Based on the source material pointed to as your inspiration for roles, I'm
a little confused as to how roles and classes
--- Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Incidently, I think I've caught on to _one_ of the concepts in the
upcoming object-orientation proposal: linguistically, there's a triad
of basic verbs - namely be, do, and have. If I'm following
things properly, one could think of an object's
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 18:15, Jonathan Lang wrote:
Based on the source material pointed to as your inspiration for roles, I'm
a little confused as to how roles and classes could be unified. From what
I read in the source material, a key point of a role (well, they weren't
actually calling it
Paul Hodges wrote:
Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Incidently, I think I've caught on to _one_ of the concepts in the
upcoming object-orientation proposal: linguistically, there's a triad
of basic verbs - namely be, do, and have. If I'm following
things properly, one could think
13 matches
Mail list logo
