On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 01:05:21PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
I think we can certainly let the module specify the default when
someone says
use Module $hownow;
rather than
use Module :my$hownow;
I suspect the notation for setting default on the module end is simply
to allow
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Darren Duncan wrote:
An undefined value is NOT the same as zero or an empty string respectively;
the latter two are very specific and defined values, just like 7 or 'foo'.
[snip]
Therefore, I propose that the default behaviour of Perl 6 be changed or
maintained such that:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Darren Duncan wrote:
Undef means don't know, which is distinct from zero, because in the
latter case we explicitly have a value of zero.
But when we don't know we can, and generally do, make reasonable
_guesses_.
Experience has shown that 0 or '' according the context
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Darren Duncan wrote:
Actually, I don't like autovivification either, and wish there was a pragma
to make attempts to do it a fatal error; it smacks too much of using
variables that weren't declared with 'my' etc. I prefer to put in the
What has the latter to do with
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Darren Duncan wrote:
1. I accept the proposal that we just make another class that implements the
SQL concept of a null value, perhaps named Null or SQL::Null, rather than
Somebody else suggested the nicely huffmanized 'nil', which IMHO sounds
definitely interesting,
Can we make this work?
my $mod = Some::Module;
require $mod;
It's a very simple patch to pugs. While we're at it, does anybody see a
compelling reason to leave in the Perl 5 semantics of require $file?
We could follow the heuristic of the very sane Module::Load, and try
*either* a
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Michele Dondi wrote:
You have very strong arguments, but I think that Perl becoming more solid
should not come at the expense of practicity. Indeed the single warning I
Speaking of which:
| The connection between the language in which we think/program and the
| problems
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 12:13:04PM +0100, Michele Dondi wrote:
my $x;
$x-{foo}[42][2005]{bar}='quux';
Would you like to have to explicitly and verbosely declare the shape of
the structure held in $x instead?
I would like the option to have to, or to be able to do that, and maybe
to
The Perl 6 summary for the week ending 2005-12-18
Welcome to another Perl 6 summary. This has been a week of shootouts,
cleanups, relationships and cunning translations. Read on for the
details (or, this being a summary, pointers to the details).
This week in perl6-compiler
2
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Luke Palmer wrote:
On 12/15/05, Darren Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I propose, perhaps redundantly, that Perl 6 include a complete set of
native
Okay, I'm with you here. Just please stop saying native and core.
Everyone.
Here, here.
I would like to hear from Ovid
At 2:58 PM +0200 12/19/05, Gaal Yahas wrote:
Can we make this work?
my $mod = Some::Module;
require $mod;
It's a very simple patch to pugs. While we're at it, does anybody see a
compelling reason to leave in the Perl 5 semantics of require $file?
snip
I would very much appreciate
First of all, I concede that features like autovivification and
undefs defaulting to the domain-qualified 'none' are fine as what
Perl does by default, so I retract any request to change this; I am
fine for these things to remain as they are and were.
-- Darren Duncan
P.S. FYI, permit me to
On Monday 19 December 2005 05:06, Michele Dondi wrote:
Speaking of which:
| The connection between the language in which we think/program and the
| problems and solutions we can imagine is very close. For this reason
| restricting language features with the intent of eliminating programmer
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 14:58 +0200, Gaal Yahas wrote:
Can we make this work?
my $mod = Some::Module;
require $mod;
What about casting it to a package;
require ::{$mod};
(not sure if the syntax is quite right)
Sam.
14 matches
Mail list logo
