Thomas Sandla wrote:
John Williams wrote:
Good point. Another one is: how does the meta_operator determine the
identity value for user-defined operators?
Does it have to? The definition of the identity value---BTW, I like
the term neutral value better because identity also is a relation
between
According to Dave Whipp:
It'd also suggest that Copen et al should be methods on a directory
object (default object for the global forms would be $*ENV.cwd)
There is no system call fd_relative_open. You can only open
relative to the current directory, not just any directory.[*] It'd be
mean
Hi all,
S03 gives infix + a higher precedence than junctive
operators in the listed table, but that seems to contradict
the examples under Junctive operators.
The relevant parts of S03 are:
Junctive operators
1|2|3 + 4; # 5|6|7
1|2 + 34; # (4|5) (5|6)
A spelling mistake and a word, that supposedly has been forgotten.
Steven
--- apo/A06.pod Sun Apr 17 14:34:16 2005
+++ apo/A06.pod Sun Apr 17 14:42:37 2005
@@ -2021,7 +2021,7 @@
All blocks are considered closures in Perl 6, even the blocks
that declare modules or classes
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 08:56:46PM +1000, Brad Bowman wrote:
:
: Hi all,
:
: S03 gives infix + a higher precedence than junctive
: operators in the listed table, but that seems to contradict
: the examples under Junctive operators.
The table is correct, and the examples are wrong.
: The
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 07:29:33AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 08:56:46PM +1000, Brad Bowman wrote:
:
: Hi all,
:
: S03 gives infix + a higher precedence than junctive
: operators in the listed table, but that seems to contradict
: the examples under Junctive
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 02:52:27PM +0200, Steven Philip Schubiger wrote:
A spelling mistake and a word, that supposedly has been forgotten.
Steven
Applied, thanks!
Pm
--- apo/A06.pod Sun Apr 17 14:34:16 2005
+++ apo/A06.pod Sun Apr 17 14:42:37 2005
@@
Quick thought ---
Does the current design of Perl 6's hyper operators allow for
hyper-slices? I.e., if I want to model a matrix by using a list of
lists, is the following code valid/useful?
my @matrix=([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]);
my @row = @matrix[0]; # first row
my @col = @matrix[0]; #first
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 06:22:13PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
I've edited the above syntax into S06 and A06. The two patches
are attached but I don't know if you are the right one to sent
them to. Whom should I sent such patches? I just saw you applying
other patches as well.
Applied,
Hi all,
I'm back with more quoting construct madness.
First, context of hash slices:
Hash slices with {} notation are trivially either scalars or lists:
$h{'foo'} = want(); # Scalar
$h{'foo','bar'} = want(); # List
With notation the same thing happens:
$hfoo = want(); # Scalar
$hfoo bar =
On Saturday 16 April 2005 7:40 pm, Larry Wall wrote:
: Basically I'm wondering if there's a detailed
: specification of how should work.
That's a really good question, and since I don't offhand know the
right answer, I'll put this up onto the fence so it can topple over
into p6l-land where
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:28:31AM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
: David Wheeler wrote:
:
: But the first person to write [a...] gets what's comin' to 'em.
:
: Is that nothing (since '.' lt 'a'), or everything after 'a'?
Might as well make it
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. . .
-[a..z]
should be allowed/encouraged/required. It greatly improves the
readability in my estimation. The only problem with requiring .. is
that people *will* write [a-z] out of habit, and we would probably
have to outlaw the - form for
-Original Message-
From: Paul Hodges [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2005 1:30 PM
To: Larry Wall; perl6-language@perl.org
Subject: Re: should we change [^a-z] to -[a..z] instead of -[a-z]?
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. . .
-[a..z]
should
Hi,
In Perl5 there can be a flag on a variable, that shows, if it's tainted
or not. I would like you to ask, if it will be possible the same with
Perl 6, or - and I'm most interested in this -, if it's possible to
create something like this by me (defining meta information on
variables, that
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 18:04 +0200, Juerd wrote:
Aaron Sherman skribis 2005-04-15 11:45 (-0400):
What I'd really like to say is:
throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
I like the idea and propose a, aliased an for this.
Too short. Having such a short
Aaron Sherman skribis 2005-04-17 18:23 (-0400):
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 18:04 +0200, Juerd wrote:
throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
I like the idea and propose a, aliased an for this.
Too short.
There is a rule of thumb, I don't know who came up with it,
David Christensen writes:
Quick thought ---
Does the current design of Perl 6's hyper operators allow for
hyper-slices? I.e., if I want to model a matrix by using a list of
lists, is the following code valid/useful?
my @matrix=([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]);
my @row = @matrix[0]; # first
BRTHZI Andrs writes:
Hi,
In Perl5 there can be a flag on a variable, that shows, if it's tainted
or not. I would like you to ask, if it will be possible the same with
Perl 6, or - and I'm most interested in this -, if it's possible to
create something like this by me (defining meta
I definitely like the hyper stuff how it is; maybe the answer is to
just define an infix:[[]] operator which returns the crosswise slice
of a nested list of lists. In any case it could be shunted aside to
some package and certainly does not need to be in core.
David
my @transposed =
At least for the usage described in this thread, I don't see any need
at all to add new syntax to Perl 6. The existing syntax provides for
a much simpler solution yet, which also is in Perl 5.
This is the format of what I do to solve the same problem right now
in my Locale::KeyedText test
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 07:54:18PM +0300, Roie Marianer wrote:
: Hi all,
: I'm back with more quoting construct madness.
Kewl, d00d.
: First, context of hash slices:
: Hash slices with {} notation are trivially either scalars or lists:
: $h{'foo'} = want(); # Scalar
: $h{'foo','bar'} = want();
On 4/15/05, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I'd really like to say is:
throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
Anything wrong with:
my $sql = q{...};
temp $sql = q{...};
Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: First, context of hash slices:
: Hash slices with {} notation are trivially either scalars or lists:
: $h{'foo'} = want(); # Scalar
: $h{'foo','bar'} = want(); # List
Right.
Tangentially, that makes me wonder: is there a difference between
scalar
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 08:00:00PM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: : First, context of hash slices:
: : Hash slices with {} notation are trivially either scalars or lists:
: : $h{'foo'} = want(); # Scalar
: : $h{'foo','bar'} = want(); # List
:
25 matches
Mail list logo
