Now that Clint has Eliza running on Parrot, I propose that
from henceforth, Eliza shall field all newbie questions
and take responsibility of the FAQ.
Eliza should also field discussions concerning why we don't
add new keywords such as elloopo; if you can convince
Eliza, then the proposal shall
Damian, now having terrible visions of someone suggesting Celswhen ;-)
Then may I also give you nightmares on: elsdo, elsdont, elsgrep, elstry ...
:-)
-Miko
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
Damian, now having terrible visions of someone suggesting Celswhen ;-)
Then may I also give you nightmares on: elsdo, elsdont, elsgrep, elstry ...
Ooh! Why don't we have a dont command! With several variants:
dont FILE
dont BLOCK
On Tuesday, April 30, 2002, at 01:22 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:07 PM -0400 4/30/02, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
Damian, now having terrible visions of someone suggesting
Celswhen ;-)
Then may I also give you nightmares on: elsdo, elsdont, elsgrep,
elstry ...
Has anyone brought up
On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 13:07, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
Damian, now having terrible visions of someone suggesting Celswhen ;-)
Then may I also give you nightmares on: elsdo, elsdont, elsgrep, elstry ...
Aaron, trying hard not to be a crackpot, but getting the impression
that's now just a dream
Why not allow Celse if while still allowing Celsif as a synonym,
preserving backwards compatibility while still allowing all these weird
and varied constructs people seem to have use for?
In any case, I don't really see why Cloop...else necessarily implies all
these other cases, too. Maybe
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Trey Harris wrote:
Why not allow Celse if while still allowing Celsif as a synonym,
preserving backwards compatibility while still allowing all these weird
and varied constructs people seem to have use for?
Backwards compatability is pretty much a lost cause for Perl 6.
In a message dated Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Trey Harris wrote:
Why not allow Celse if while still allowing Celsif as a synonym,
preserving backwards compatibility while still allowing all these weird
and varied constructs people seem to have use for?
Then if you want else when or else do, you're all set. It's an easy
change and there are no new keywords.
Agree with everything else you said. One minor question: how would else
do be different than else? do always does, doesn't it?
-Miko
so, assuming we have;
print 'you gave me: wordlist = ';# single quote - no interpolation
for words - $it {
print;
FIRST { print '(' }# provisionally
NEXT { print ',' }
LAST {print ');' }
}
# and maybe
else {
print ();\n;
}
this yields:
you gave me:
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Jim Cromie wrote:
so, assuming we have;
print 'you gave me: wordlist = ';# single quote - no interpolation
for words - $it {
print;
FIRST { print '(' }# provisionally
NEXT { print ',' }
LAST {print ');' }
}
# and maybe
else {
print
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:07 PM -0400 4/30/02, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
Damian, now having terrible visions of someone suggesting
Celswhen ;-)
Then may I also give you nightmares on: elsdo, elsdont, elsgrep,
elstry ...
Has anyone brought up elselse or unlessunless yet?
and since
At 11:11 AM 4/30/2002 -0400, Melvin Smith wrote:
Now that Clint has Eliza running on Parrot, I propose that
from henceforth, Eliza shall field all newbie questions
and take responsibility of the FAQ.
[...]
WE WERE DISCUSSING YOU NOT ME.
we were DISCUSSING ELLOOPO!
SYMBOL NAME TOO LONG: we were
Lots of people said:
Lots of stuff about 'else' loops.
*Erik thunks himself some deep thought*
I see no true slippery slope here, especially if handled correctly. I suspect that an
explicit or implicit why not near the beginning of discussion lead to the feature
feeding frenzy and the
14 matches
Mail list logo
