On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:26:49PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
say foo()($x);
I'm pretty sure you meant single-quoted, and you perhaps might maybe
need a dot there:
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 12:57:32AM +0200, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:26:49PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
say foo()($x);
I'm pretty sure you meant single-quoted, and you perhaps might maybe
need a dot
Rob Kinyon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley said:
in other words, some way of declaring that a subroutine wants to hang onto
every lexical it can see in its lexical stack, not matter what static
analysis
may say.
I'm not arguing with the idea, in general. I just want to point out
Rod Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley wrote:
Chip and I have been having a discussion. I want to write:
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
say foo()($x);
I claim that that should print 1. Chip claims it should throw a warning about
because of timely
On 6/12/05, Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chip and I have been having a discussion. I want to write:
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
say foo()($x);
I claim that that should print 1. Chip claims it should throw a warning about
because of timely
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 11:24:07AM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
I just have to say that it's really annoying running into
optimizations when I don't want them.
Isn't the whole point of optimisations that you shouldn't have to worry
about whether you hit one or not, otherwise the optimisation
On 6/13/05, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 11:24:07AM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
Back when I wrote an
back-chaining system in perl, I used tied variables in order to
determine when I needed to solve for something. A
Hi,
# No problem:
my $data = BEGIN {
my $fh = open some_file err...;
=$fh;
};
# Problem;
my $fh = BEGIN { open some_file err... };
# Compile-time filehandle leaked into runtime!
say =$fh;
In Perl 5, this wasn't a problem, as compilation and execution happended
(most of the
Hi,
just checking: Are anonymous macros allowed?
my $macro = macro ($x) { 100$x };
say $macro(3); # 1003
Of course, anonymous macros can't be called at compile-time, like normal
macros:
my $macro = rand 0.5
?? macro ($x) { 100$x }
:: macro ($x) { 200$x };
say $macro(3); # 1003
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 17:07 +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
# No problem:
my $data = BEGIN {
my $fh = open some_file err...;
=$fh;
};
# Problem;
my $fh = BEGIN { open some_file err... };
# Compile-time filehandle leaked into runtime!
say =$fh;
Perhaps I'm being
Hi,
chromatic wrote:
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 17:07 +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
# No problem:
my $data = BEGIN {
my $fh = open some_file err...;
=$fh;
};
# Problem;
my $fh = BEGIN { open some_file err... };
# Compile-time filehandle leaked into runtime!
say
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 10:48:47AM -0700, chromatic wrote:
# Problem;
my $fh = BEGIN { open some_file err... };
# Compile-time filehandle leaked into runtime!
say =$fh;
Perhaps I'm being very naive, but why is this a problem? Maybe it's not
the best way to do something, but I
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 05:25:59PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: just checking: Are anonymous macros allowed?
I have no problem with macros being first-class objects during
the compile. Though the macro itself may have a problem with your
passing it '3' when it is likely expecting an AST.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:36:52PM -0400, Joshua Gatcomb wrote:
Ok, are there any guidelines for what should and should not be put
forward as a patch. I can see 3 key areas of concern:
1. Framework for unwritten Synopses (so we know what goes where)
2. Heading placeholders for written
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:22:59PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:36:52PM -0400, Joshua Gatcomb wrote:
Ok, are there any guidelines for what should and should not be put
forward as a patch.
[...]
For anything that doesn't come from @Larry or $Larry, I think we
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:22:59PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 02:36:52PM -0400, Joshua Gatcomb wrote:
I have included a sample framework for chapter 17. Theoretically,
someone could then go search the archives for decision points in any
of those headings and
Hey,
Found out this morning that wizard.p6 suddenly stopped wondering and I was
stumped as to why. The autrijus came along and pointed out that i was
defineing an Object class of my own. This was obliterating the built in
class causing all other classes to fail to work at all. It would seem
You shouldn't be able to reopen/clobber an existing class/module unless
you specify
class Object is augmented {...}
class Object is replaced {...}
or some such (the trait names are still negotiable). In general,
private classes should start with my or our, though I don't know
if Pugs
18 matches
Mail list logo
