At 10:40 PM 11/14/2003 -0800, chromatic wrote:
I'd really like to see people start turning the existing design
documents into story cards and programmer tests for Perl 6. That'll
make it much easier to implement the thing.
So basically go back through the existing Apoc/Exeg's and break it down
So I've been lingering around p6-language for a few months now, and have
noticed the following two trends:
1) All of the work forward on p6 design seems to come from either Larry or
Damian. (If there are others working in the shadows back there, please make
yourselves heard.) Most, if not all,
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 22:23, Rod Adams wrote:
(If there are others working in the shadows back there, please make
yourselves heard.)
Allison Randal, Dan Sugalski, Hugo van der Sanden, and I usually help
out.
Can apocalypses be something more along the line of scratches on the wall,
that
Here's a list of what any Perl 6 implementation of lexicals must be able to
cope with (barring additions from future apocalyses). Can anyone think of
anything else?
From Perl 5:
* multiple instances of the same variable name within different scopes
of the same sub
* The notion of
