HaloO,
another self-reply :)
I've added a little hack that classifies strings
into these areas 0 to 3 to illustrate my idea of
a type lattice on which composes the background
of the Perl 6 Type System. Pattern matching and
type systems are related but the question for
Perl 6 is: how exactly?
The
HaloO Larry,
you wrote:
One can view the auto-coercion as a form of MMD if you allow the
autogeneration of any necessary coercion methods. However, it's not
exactly a coercion to Str or Int--it's more like promotion to a Scalar
that is able to pretend it is either Str or Int. Or you can view it
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 21:12 +0100, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
The roles themself beeing the least member of these classes---uninstanciable
pure
behaviour. The intersection type/role AB is multiple inheritance (or is that
roling?):
I don't understand the question (I don't recognize the words lubs
HaloO chromatic,
you wrote:
I don't understand the question (I don't recognize the words lubs or
glbs, for example), but I don't think this has anything at all to do
with multiple inheritance.
Sorry, that was given only in the picture:
lub = least upper bound (also known as supremum)
glb =
I wrote:
A|B lub (lowest upper bound)
/ \
/ \
A 0 B
/ \ / \
/ \ / \
/ AB \ glb (greatest lower bound)
/ 1 / \ 2 \
/ / 3 \ \
I was a bit
HaloO Aaron,
you wrote:
Is there any reason at all that 6.0 should have return MMD? I mean, it's
way-the-heck cool and all, but it became a thing when Parrot produced
this capability as a by-product of the way MMD was implemented in
conjunction with return continuations that doesn't mean we
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:34, Thomas Sandla wrote:
Am I missing something, but the only thing I've figured out so far is that
Parrot uses ternary MMD for its builtin binary ops like ADD, MUL, OR, etc.
They are ternary to prevent a final copy or conversion of the result to the
target register.
HaloO Aaron,
you wrote:
Um... I think you're thinking of operator overloading, which in Parrot
actually does use the MMD facility under the hood, but MMD is nominally
a separate facility. You should glance at the PDDs, as they have far
more detail than I'm aware of.
You mean the ones in the
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 12:45, Thomas Sandla wrote:
Sorry, if this is the wrong list for discussing these Parrot details.
Yeah, you really want to be in p6i, not p6l. These guys think a Parrot's
just a bird that says funny things and sits on a pirate's shoulder ;-)
PS:
Thomas Sandlaß [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am I missing something, but the only thing I've figured out so far is that
Parrot uses ternary MMD for its builtin binary ops like ADD, MUL, OR, etc.
actually binary, dispatch is based on (left, right) operands.
They are ternary to prevent a final copy
Thomas Sandlaß [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The opcodes for 'callmethod_MMD_3_sig func' and 'callmethod_MMD_n
func, n' are simply not there yet, right?
No. The problem is that at function call time there is no indication
that a MMD subroutine should be called. So Parrot will just do a full
MMD
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 12:45:45AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: So, I think late binding is a sensible (and practical) default, but
: do you think it may be a good thing to have a type inference mode that
: assign static contexts to expressions, and prebind as much as
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 12:45:45AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 12:17:19PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: And how does all this combine with the notion of context?
Lazily, for the most part. In some cases we can determine context at
compile time, but often not.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 05:17:50PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
: On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 12:45:45AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 12:17:19PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: : And how does all this combine with the notion of context?
:
: Lazily, for the most part. In
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 12:45:45AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 12:17:19PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: : And how does all this combine with the notion of context?
:
: Lazily, for the most part. In some cases we can determine context at
: compile time, but often not.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 09:42:30AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
Anyway, I don't profess to have thought deeply about type inferencing.
But I do know that I don't want to turn Perl 6 into ML just yet...
Larry
Speaking of ML, it appears to me that Perl6 rules are a mechanism that
can act very
HaloO,
I'm very puzzled about what is meant by type and class in Perl6.
In the sort ruling
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/perl.perl6.language/msg/1eb1ed4608f5604d
we saw a system of types that allow to nicely dispatch into different version
of sort. OTOH every class or role name can serve the
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 06:21:02PM +0100, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: HaloO,
:
: I'm very puzzled about what is meant by type and class in Perl6.
: In the sort ruling
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/perl.perl6.language/msg/1eb1ed4608f5604d
: we saw a system of types that allow to nicely
18 matches
Mail list logo
