Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Dov Wasserman
Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : does that mean that this use of yada yada yada is already decided on and allowed? Yes, with the proviso that it only works that way where a term is expected. (As a postfix operator it's short for C..Inf.) So, C... is a

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Matthew Walton
I actually find myself having somewhat coherent thoughts on this matter. Apologies if they seem rather obvious or naive, but I'm still new to all this. Dov Wasserman wrote: my $id = ...; my Int age = ...; my Str $name = ...; my DbHandle $db = ...; my Int of Hash @array = ...; Therefore, the

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Matthew Walton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dov Wasserman wrote: my $id = ...; my Int age = ...; my Str $name = ...; my DbHandle $db = ...; my Int of Hash @array = ...; Therefore, the compile-time type of the term must be assignment-compatible with any and all lvalues. This

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Matthew Walton
Austin Hastings wrote: I think of this as very much like the typed-undef we discussed last month or so: ... should return an unthrown exception wrapped in undef-ness. The type returned by ... should just have a multitude of type-casting tricks associated: my int $i = ...; # Fails at compile

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more (2)

2004-05-14 Thread Austin Hastings
Sorry for the broken reply, but my webmailer makes my life difficult. --- Matthew Walton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Might be nice to have a small checker that you can use on production === message truncated === Yes. Of course, I fully expect that according to the principle of maximal surprise,

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Matthew Walton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Austin Hastings wrote: my int $i = ...; # Fails at compile time -- no good conversion. my Int $i = ...; # Warns at compile time, fails at runtime. I don't get the reasoning here. If Yada Yada Yada is to indicate code that you haven't written yet, it should never

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Larry Wall
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 07:48:52AM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote: : : --- Matthew Walton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : I don't get the reasoning here. If Yada Yada Yada is to indicate : code that you haven't written yet, it should never fail at compile : time unless it's impossible to compile the

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread mark . a . biggar
Austin Hastings wrote: my int $i = ...; # Fails at compile time -- no good conversion. my Int $i = ...; # Warns at compile time, fails at runtime. I don't get the reasoning here. If Yada Yada Yada is to indicate code that you haven't written yet, it should never fail at compile

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more (2)

2004-05-14 Thread Richard Nuttall
Austin Hastings wrote: Maybe this is how they'll teach perl at religious schools: #! /usr/bin/perl6 -w # # TEMPLATE.P6 -- standard template for programs at Abstemious U. # use no ...; sub usage() {...} sub main() {...} Aha, this is where the DWIM::AI module I suggested on 01-Apr

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 07:48:52AM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote: : I've argued in the past that it should be possible to put undef : into lctypes, to no avail. So, since no special values can go : into lctypes, I presume this applies to Yadda as well

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Larry Wall
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 10:56:52AM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote: : It's still invalid to try to fill an lctype with Yadda because of the : domain issue, right? That's correct. It would in theory be possible to store a defined bit off to the side somewhere, but that pretty much defeats the

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Thu, 2004-05-13 at 15:35, Dov Wasserman wrote: [Special Property #1] If the Yada operator is valid anywhere a term is expected, it must syntactically valid in all these cases: my $id = ...; Since I presume C... is going to be of type Object or whatever the universal base class was (I

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Fri, 2004-05-14 at 10:48, Austin Hastings wrote: my int $i = ...; Right. This goes back to the notion that lowercase basic types (int, str, bool) are storage efficient and therefore cannot contain values outside the domain, like Cundef. Nope, not at all. You can say: my int

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
Aaron Sherman wrote: I can imagine how you would define the constructor on the receiving type in Perl 6, but there's no casting syntax in Perl 6. Should we pretend there is for purposes of defining a conversion and allow: class foo { ... sub

Re: Yadda yadda yadda some more

2004-05-14 Thread Luke Palmer
Aaron Sherman writes: The question I have is: how do classes control their conversion? In C++ you can overload the casting operator for any time and/or define a constructor for the receiving type. I can imagine how you would define the constructor on the receiving type in Perl 6, but