Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Luke Palmer
Aaron Sherman writes: Larry Wall wrote: $_ $xType of Match ImpliedMatching Code == = == Any Code$ scalar sub truth match if $x($_) This bit of POD made me think about POD's lack of tabular formatting,

Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Larry Wall
On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 12:03:10AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote: : I've already had my epiphany about POD, though, so I'll spare doing it : again. In short, there are two things that I see about POD that need to : change: : : =over : : =item 1) : : C=directive lines shouldn't have to be in their

Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Aaron Sherman
L:uke, just a note before I reply to you specifically: I understand your concerns, and I have no interest in blurring the line between presentation and markup, which I think ultimately is where your concern comes from. In fact, if you re-read what I wrote (and what I write below), you'll see

Re: Synopsis 2 draft 1 -- each and every

2004-08-21 Thread Adam D. Lopresto
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Dan Hursh wrote: Peter Behroozi wrote: I'm not particular to any of the verbs used yet, but maybe that's because I don't think of the as a general iterator, but more of a gobbler-type creature (and formerly a globber, too). Could we try: for $foo.fetch { ... }

Re: - as - with automatic is rw

2004-08-21 Thread Adam D. Lopresto
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004, Larry Wall wrote: On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 10:07:02PM +0200, Juerd wrote: : I'm proposing : : for zip(@foos, @bars, @xyzzies) - $foo, $bar, $xyzzy { ... } : for %quux.kv - $key, $value { ... } That'd probably work on the keys only if the hash was declared to

Re: Synopsis 2 draft 1 -- each and every

2004-08-21 Thread David Green
On 8/20/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luke Palmer) wrote: So all the laziness goes into the array implementation. But you don't even need to write your iterator fancily. If you just write your scalar version of postcircumfix:, Perl will do the rest. So if you use an iterator in list context, Perl will

Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Juerd
$_ $xType of Match ImpliedMatching Code == = == Any Code$ scalar sub truth match if $x($_) How about making paragraphs that have a line like the divider one above special? By simply parsing the =

Re: - as - with automatic is rw

2004-08-21 Thread Juerd
Larry Wall skribis 2004-08-20 13:31 (-0700): Unfortunately I'm not sure it passes the Are there already too many ways to declare a sub? test... I'm not seeing it as another way. Technically, of course it is different, but by the user, - and - will probably be seen as one thing, with one of them

Re: Return with no expression

2004-08-21 Thread Matthew Walton
Larry Wall wrote: On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 09:21:02AM +0100, Matthew Walton wrote: : It would be nice if rand behaved a bit more sanely in Perl 6. I can : understand the reasoning for making rand 0 produce between 0 and 1, but : that doesn't mean I have to like it. What makes you think there was

Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Aaron Sherman
Luke Palmer wrote: Aaron Sherman writes: H C$_ | C$x | Type of Match Implied | Matching Code T Any | CodeC $ | scalar sub truth | match if C$x($_) Oh, and BTW: My mailer seems to have snuck some extra noise in there. I think it got confused and thought there was

Re: Return with no expression

2004-08-21 Thread Aaron Sherman
Matthew Walton wrote: Larry Wall wrote: I suspect there's an argument that [0,0) ought to be considered undef (which would conveniently numerify to 0 with an optional warning). In the absence of a paradox value, undef would be fine there I think :-) Too bad we don't have NaRN (Not a Random

Re: Synopsis 2 draft 1 -- each and every

2004-08-21 Thread Luke Palmer
David Green writes: On 8/20/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luke Palmer) wrote: So all the laziness goes into the array implementation. But you don't even need to write your iterator fancily. If you just write your scalar version of postcircumfix:, Perl will do the rest. So if you use an iterator

Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Peter Scott
Maybe this train has already left the station, but I find myself preferring Kwiki syntax to POD these days... any chance we could use Kwiki with WAFL for the Perl 6 POD? That of course has already got tables. (Still bracketing with the =for ... =cut directives, though.) Just a thought... --

Re: A thought for later -- POD tables

2004-08-21 Thread Aaron Sherman
Luke Palmer wrote: On the other hand, Larry had a good point. Why couldn't we do: =begin table ... =end table For some sufficiently simple ...? Obviously this gives the formatter control over how the table is formatted, which is arguably a bad thing since it won't be implemented (POD tools are

Re: - as - with automatic is rw

2004-08-21 Thread Jonadab the Unsightly One
Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sick would be if - were introduced to make the variable write-only ;) Sicker still would be if - were introduced to make the variable neither readable nor writeable. HTH.HAND. -- $;=sub{$/};@;=map{my($a,$b)=($_,$;);$;=sub{$a.$b-()}} split//,[EMAIL PROTECTED]/