Trey Harris wrote:
A more practical application would be:
my $foo;
# Code which might or might not set $foo...
$foo //= 23;
# or
$foo is default(23);
In such a case, the Cis default just looks plain odd to me.
It is. More than that, it's plain wrong. Cis properties are
From: Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Properties are meant to be out-of-band information; miko's
suggestion would have this property setting the *value* of
the variable.
Ah, but my exact point is that the default *isn't* set immediately. The
property is held until the sub is called. If the
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 04:01:50PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was settled a while ago that sub arguments would be defaulted like this:
sub load_data ($version / /=1) {...}
(The space between / and / is on purpose, my emailer has problems if they
are together) I and a few
From: Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or are you proposing to *only* replace //=? Or are you
proposing to *only* replace //= in subroutine declarations?
Only augment //= in subroutine declarations, //= would also work.
What issues did you have with //=? It seems clear and concise
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 04:43:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only augment //= in subroutine declarations, //= would also work.
I love the //= operator, but in the context of sub declarations it's
confusing as the *only* way to default an argument.
Oh. You want default() to be
From: Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh. You want default() to be synonymous with //= but only in
subroutine declarations. That seems a tad odd. Why not make it
synonymous everywhere?
my $foo is default(23); # same as ...
my $foo //= 23;
Well, for is default to DWIM in a
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 05:06:32PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a general rule that a property must make sense in all contexts?
Nah, I was just being distracted by work and not thinking clearly
about your default() proposal. :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 03:48:41PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 04:43:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only augment //= in subroutine declarations, //= would also work.
I love the //= operator, but in the context of sub declarations it's
confusing as the
In a message dated Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Andrew Wilson writes:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 03:48:41PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 04:43:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only augment //= in subroutine declarations, //= would also work.
I love the //= operator,
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 00:37, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 04:03 PM 4/11/2002 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
Notice that we have two different types of defaulting here. The second
argument is the file to work on, and we set it to a reasonable default
if it is undefined for whatever reason. However,
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 00:47, Damian Conway wrote:
sub load_data ($filename) { load_data($filename, 1) }
sub load_data ($filename, $version) {...}
Interesting. This brings goto to mind. Above, I could just assume that
inlining will happen, but what about goto? Obviously:
sub
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:45:55PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
Indeed, and with the //= thing, you can let parameters in the middle
default.
Except that I haven't heard anyone say that given
sub foo ($a//=1, $b//=2, $c//=3) {...}
foo(5,,6); # that
[Apologies to Aaron Sherman, who gets this twice due to my
dunderheadedness]
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Also, another though:
sub foo($a = 1, $b, $c) { ... }
In C++ at least, I think this is an error. However, it seems to me that
in Perl it could be interpreted
sub foo($a=1, $b, $c=3) { ... }
is ambiguous: While foo(2) sets $a=1, $b=2, $c=3, it's impossible to
say what foo(4,5) should do.
foo(2) means that $a = 2, $b defaults to undef, $c defaults to 3
foo(4,5) means $a = 4, $b = 5, and $c defaults to 3.
-Miko
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 09:59, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
[Apologies to Aaron Sherman, who gets this twice due to my
dunderheadedness]
No problem. I usually reply to the person and CC the list because some
folks have filters that will make discussions easier if I'm replying to
them vs. sending just
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 11:55, Aaron Sherman wrote:
1. The first default marks the beginning of optional parameters.
2. An optional parameter with no default will automatically default to
undef.
Interestingly, I just said something that I did not mean to, but it
opens up an interesting avenue.
class myobj {
...
int a,b,c;
myobj(int aa, int bb, int cc) :
a(aa), b(bb), c(cc) const {}
...
};
Ummm no. Straight from Bjarne: You can't have a const constructor. You
just do what you did without
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 12:44, Luke Palmer wrote:
class myobj {
...
int a,b,c;
myobj(int aa, int bb, int cc) :
a(aa), b(bb), c(cc) const {}
...
};
Ummm no. Straight from Bjarne: You can't have a const
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 00:47, Damian Conway wrote:
sub load_data ($filename) { load_data($filename, 1) }
sub load_data ($filename, $version) {...}
Interesting. This brings goto to mind. Above, I could just assume
that inlining will
Miko O'Sullivan writes:
: I think you're right that this is a valid distinction, I'm just not
: sure if it's not a little too subtle and that the two different
: notations won't cause confusion.
:
: Well, I had been hoping to appeal to the mathematical mindset of the list,
: but there is a
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 14:34, Larry Wall wrote:
Miko O'Sullivan writes:
: Well, I had been hoping to appeal to the mathematical mindset of the list,
: but there is a second reason for = in addition to / /=: it's simpler to
: understand. I just think that the potential Perl hackers will
At 04:03 PM 4/11/2002 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 14:34, Larry Wall wrote:
Miko O'Sullivan writes:
: Well, I had been hoping to appeal to the mathematical mindset of the
list,
: but there is a second reason for = in addition to / /=: it's simpler to
: understand.
Miko O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The current plans indicate that a subroutine's params should be defaulted
like this:
sub load_data ($filename ; $version / /= 1) {...}
(The space between / and / is on purpose, my emailer has problems if
they are together.) If that's the
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
Miko O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The current plans indicate that a subroutine's params should be defaulted
like this:
sub load_data ($filename ; $version / /= 1) {...}
(The space between / and / is on purpose, my emailer has
Piers wrote:
one could always handle the first case
more explicitly by doing:
sub load_data ($filename; $version) {
$version = 1 if _.length 2;
...
}
Err...no. If you specify named parameters, you don't get _.
It could be handled by overloading though:
sub
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers wrote:
one could always handle the first case
more explicitly by doing:
sub load_data ($filename; $version) {
$version = 1 if @_.length 2;
...
}
Err...no. If you specify named parameters, you don't get @_.
It could be
26 matches
Mail list logo
