HaloO,
Yuval Kogman wrote:
Today on #perl6 I complained about the fact that this is always
inelegant:
if ($condition) { pre }
unconditional midsection;
if ($condition) { post }
I'm not sure if you would considered closure traits as equally
inelegant but what are PRE
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 14:47:33 -0400, Austin Frank wrote:
Would the named adverbs for gather work in other contexts as well?
Would you suggest this mechanism for specifying the buffering
behavior for IO operations?
See scook's email below... I think that yes. Here is a reference
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 21:09:09 +0200, Juerd wrote:
Mark Reed skribis 2005-09-20 14:31 (-0400):
This has so little redundancy that it makes very little sense to want to
avoid repeating that very short encode_entities($item-label).
The fine line is when the midsection is slightly more than
HaloO Larry,
you wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 10:51:53PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: If we go with these changes, this functionality (starting place for a
: search) would be available by using
:
: Foo::Bar$symbol_to_lookup; # right?
Presumably, though Foo::Bar differs from
HaloO Yuval,
you wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 14:07:51 +0200, TSa wrote:
role Object does Compare[Object, =:=]
role Numdoes Compare[Num, ==]
role Strdoes Compare[Str, eq]
What is the implication of from the perspective of the person using
Object, Num and Str?
Do they have
On 2005-09-21 03:53, Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 21:09:09 +0200, Juerd wrote:
Mark Reed skribis 2005-09-20 14:31 (-0400):
This has so little redundancy that it makes very little sense to want to
avoid repeating that very short encode_entities($item-label).
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 08:16:23PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
http://svn.openfoundry.org/pugs/perl5/Perl6-MetaModel2.0/docs/
p6_role_model.jpg
I am planning on making Roles self-bootstrapping, so the class(Role)
will actually be the first Role in the system. From there, Class will
do
Every time I've desired a feature for Perl6 it has turned out that either
it was already planned to be there or I have been given good resons why it
would have been better not be there.
Now in Perl(5) {forum,newsgroup}s you can often see people doing stuff
like
my @files=grep !/^\.{1,2}/,
HaloO,
Nathan Gray wrote:
The order that a class does roles is significant, because if two roles
define the same method, only the first one is catalogued by the class
instance.
Ups, this contradicts the concept of class composition which in the
above case should raise an error instead of
On 9/21/05, Michele Dondi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Letting aside the fact that in the 99% of times they're plainly
reinventing the wheel of glob() a.k.a. File::Glob, there are indeed
situations in which one may have stuff like
for (@foo) {
next if $_ eq 'boo';
# do something useful here
}
Hi,
quick questions:
my $pair = (a = 42);
say ~$pair; # a\t42? a\t42\n? a 42?
say +$pair; # 0 (pairs aren't numbers)?
# 42?
# 0 (a is not a number)?
# 0 (~$pair can't be used as a number)?
say ?$pair; # true (because 42 is
Ingo Blechschmidt skribis 2005-09-21 14:47 (+):
my $pair = (a = 42);
say ~$pair; # a\t42? a\t42\n? a 42?
say +$pair; # 0 (pairs aren't numbers)?
# 42?
# 0 (a is not a number)?
# 0 (~$pair can't be used as a number)?
Nathan,
On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:02 AM, Nathan Gray wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 08:16:23PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
http://svn.openfoundry.org/pugs/perl5/Perl6-MetaModel2.0/docs/
p6_role_model.jpg
I am planning on making Roles self-bootstrapping, so the class(Role)
will actually be the
Hi,
(sorry for the long delay.)
Juerd juerd at convolution.nl writes:
Ingo Blechschmidt skribis 2005-09-19 14:21 (+):
\(1,2,3);# Reference to a list promoted to an array (!)
\(((1,2,3)));# same
Except that it has to be a reference to a reference, because (1,2)
Ingo~
On 9/21/05, Ingo Blechschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
foo(1,2,3); # infix:, *not* called
foo (1,2,3); # same as
foo( (1,2,3) ); # infix:, called
Do you mean this to read?
foo(1,2,3); # infix:, *not* called
foo .(1,2,3);# infix:, *not* called
Hi,
Matt Fowles wrote:
On 9/21/05, Ingo Blechschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
foo(1,2,3); # infix:, *not* called
foo (1,2,3); # same as
foo( (1,2,3) ); # infix:, called
Do you mean this to read?
foo(1,2,3); # infix:, *not* called
foo .(1,2,3);#
Ingo Blechschmidt skribis 2005-09-21 17:24 (+0200):
multi prefix:\ (Item $item) {...}
multi prefix:\ (@array) {...}
multi prefix:\ (%hash) {...}
I keep forgetting. What's the rule for determining that the (Item $item)
is used, rather than (@array), when one uses \$aref?
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 09:54:33 -0400, Mark Reed wrote:
Watch the attributions, please. I didn't write the above text - Juerd did.
Sorry, I must have gotten confused when I was snipping
--
() Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xEBD27418 perl hacker
/\ kung foo master: /me supports the
Hey,
Since you wouldn't expect an object to stringify or numify why expect pairs
to? I'm not sure i see any value in thatm, $pair.perl.say would be the best
way to output one anyway.
my $pair1 = (a = 2);
my $pari2 = (b = 3);
say $pair1 + $par2; # Error: illegal stringification of pair.?
I know
Eric skribis 2005-09-21 16:46 (-0600):
Since you wouldn't expect an object to stringify or numify [...]
Oh? I would in fact expect many objects to stringify or numify to useful
values. Just like I expect an array reference to stringify as if it was
an array, I expect an HTTP header object to
On 22/09/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By the way, is it really this simple?
class HTTP::Header is Pair {
foo {
{.key}: {.value ~~ s/\n/\n /g}
}
}
Where foo is whatever is needed to override stringification.
Something along the lines of `method
On 22/09/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think +(~$pair) makes any sense, though. It's basically the same
as +(~$pair.key). It's probably wise to avoid that $pair can be confused
for its key or value. A good alternative is hard to find, though. I tend
to prefer 1 at this moment
Eric wrote:
Hey,
Since you wouldn't expect an object to stringify or numify why expect pairs
to? I'm not sure i see any value in thatm, $pair.perl.say would be the best
way to output one anyway.
my $pair1 = (a = 2);
my $pari2 = (b = 3);
say $pair1 + $par2; # Error: illegal stringification of
23 matches
Mail list logo
