Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread David Storrs
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 12:43:30PM -0700, Scott Bronson wrote: So, in summary, though 0==false appears to work, it leads to a number of strange boundary conditions and, therefore, bugs. It's hard for new programmers to grasp and even old hacks are still sometimes tripped up by it. It just

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Matthew Walton
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paul Hodges wrote: | --- Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | |Paul Hodges writes: | |So, in P6: | | if 0 { print 0\n; } # I assume this won't print. | if '0' { print '0'\n; } # I assume this won't print. | if ''{ print ''\n;}

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Jonadab the Unsightly One
Paul Hodges wrote: So a null byte is still Boolean true. Ugh, yarf, ack, etc. But as long as I know -- easy enough to check explicitly. But just tell me thisam I the only guy who thinks this *feels* wierd? It doesn't feel weird to me, but my previous languages of choice were fairly high-level

more than one modifier

2004-06-25 Thread perl6-language-return-17601-archive=jab . org
Hello, I have a wish for Perl6. I think it would be nice to have the possibility for more than one modifier after a simple statement. For example: print $a+$b if $a if $b for 1..3; Gerd Pokorra E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: more than one modifier

2004-06-25 Thread Juerd
Please configure your email client correctly. (I'm surprised that the message was accepted, even) [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis 2004-06-25 13:38 (-): I have a wish for Perl6. I think it would be nice to have the possibility for more than one modifier after a simple statement. Has been

Re: more than one modifier

2004-06-25 Thread Stéphane Payrard
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 03:38:51PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I have a wish for Perl6. I think it would be nice to have the possibility for more than one modifier after a simple statement. For example: print $a+$b if $a if $b for 1..3; Gerd Pokorra

Re: more than one modifier

2004-06-25 Thread Juerd
Stéphane Payrard skribis 2004-06-25 16:15 (-0400): It is unpossible to stack loop modifiers without adding conventions denoting the iterators. Is it really? I've always thought this would be useful enough: say .{foo} for @$_ for @foo; Although that can probably just be written as:

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon
Paul Hodges wrote: So a null byte is still Boolean true. But just tell me thisam I the only guy who thinks this *feels* wierd? Understanding the reason doesn't make it any more ~comfortable~. I think you are. Perl considers null to be data--it's that simple. Remember, while Perl can work

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Spider Boardman
At some point in history, Paul Hodges wrote (in part): ph So a null byte is still Boolean true. Ugh, yarf, ack, etc. No. And it never has been (at least in my world view). However, asking that question explains some things. See below for more. ph But as long as I know -- easy enough to

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Scott Bronson
On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 21:45, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote: Perhaps not as happy as you think: my $foo = '0'; my String $bar = '0'; if $foo { say 'foo true' } if $bar { say 'bar true' } Would print 'bar true', but not 'foo true'. Frankly, I love it. Since I plan on

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Spider Boardman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At some point in history, Paul Hodges wrote (in part): ph So a null byte is still Boolean true. Ugh, yarf, ack, etc. No. And it never has been (at least in my world view). A valid point, though I reply: my $x = \0; print true if $x;