BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Google Inc//Google Calendar 70.9054//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:REQUEST
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART:20090610T00Z
DTEND:20090610T03Z
DTSTAMP:20090605T035152Z
ORGANIZER;CN=jason switzer:mailto:jswit...@gmail.com
UID:g3rsts66avsaacp817n7ri1...@google.com
According to Damian Conway:
{
temp sub false() {0}
# etc.
}
I'm a bit concerned about what that would do to subroutines in other
modules called during the block's execution. Perhaps my sub instead?
PS: I wonder if the names would be FALSE and TRUE to
This is a small collection of ideas for the Perl6 language. Think of this
posting as a light and refreshing summer fruit salad, composed of three
ideas to while away the time during this August lull in perl6-language.
Give split an
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 06:02:14PM -0400, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
It would be really groovy if that expression could be split with the
delimiters in place, something like this:
tokens = split _/[?=*-+]/, $sql, keep='all';
and get back an array with these values: ('rank', '=', '?')
MO == Miko O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MO Give split an option to keep the delimiters in the returned array
perl5 can already do that. just wrap the delim part in parens and split
will return them. also by using a lookahead/behind as the regex split
won't strip out that text and it
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 06:02:14PM -0400, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
This is a small collection of ideas for the Perl6 language. Think of this
posting as a light and refreshing summer fruit salad, composed of three
ideas to while away the time during this August lull in perl6-language.
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 08:30:05AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
@arr[@arr.length] = $var;
or maybe just :
@arr[.length] = $var;
(if an array were to be made the topic inside its own accessor brackets).
I know this idea was just thrown in there, but I find that I really
On Thursday, August 1, 2002, at 04:05 PM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
Having the subscript operator change the topic is, IMHO, a rather strong
violation of the principle of least surprise.
I'm inclined to agree. I think I'd much rather not have it change there,
since I'll frequently do stuff like
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 06:17:11PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
do these instead:
$bool += 0 ;
($x == $y) + 0
or even
$x == $y || 0
--
Never do today what you can put off till tomorrow.
Having the subscript operator change the topic is, IMHO, a rather strong
violation of the principle of least surprise.
I'm inclined to agree. I think I'd much rather not have it change there,
since I'll frequently do stuff like this:
my %hash;
for qw(one two three) {
%hash{$_} =
10 matches
Mail list logo
