On Sunday, October 01, 2000 1:37 AM, Perl6 RFC Librarian
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Improvement needed in error messages (both internal errors and die function).
Feel free to put anything you like
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 1:38 AM, Perl6 RFC Librarian
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Allow multiply matched groups in regexes to return a listref of all matches
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer:
On Wednesday, September 27, 2000 4:17 AM, Tom Christiansen
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
This is screaming mad. I will become perl6's greatest detractor and
anti-campaigner if this nullcrap happens. And I will never shut up
about it,
either. Mark my words.
Quote from Larry: "I have a
On Wednesday, September 27, 2000 10:21 AM, John Porter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
Philip Newton wrote:
On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
indentation to define block structure.
What an idea! I wonder why no
I'm afraid I had a family crisis yesterday, else another RFC would have been
submitted.
Part of Perl's problems, a severe internal problem that has external (user
side) consequences, is that Perl does *not* have anyone to speak policy with,
while the community itself is submerged in issues of
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:02 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
The Perl-KGB-elite has got to go, and a free republic must replace
it.
I wouldn't go as far as your entire post, neither in form nor content,
but I do have concerns about the sociopsycho(patho)logy of
*All* communities have this. It's the nature of people. Pretending it might
be otherwise is to paint a rather pleasant utopian fantasy that,
unfortunately, can't exist. (At least not one that has people in it) It's
one of the common failings of people involved in open source projects.
Tad McClellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry to mention the code name thing again, I thought the
whole endeavor rather silly.
But I just stumbled upon the dictionary definition below, so
I submit it for due (mis)consideration:
pearly everlasting:
n. A rhizomatous
"Bryan C. Warnock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 05 Jan 2001, Piers Cawley wrote:
But, but... 0.21 is *not* 'point twenty one', it's 'point two one',
otherwise you get into weirdness with: .21 and .210 being spoken as
'point twenty one' and 'point two hundred (?:and)? ten' and all
I have an idea. Send that japanese to Larry and have him translate it.
However he translates it, it's official.
p
Jeff Okamoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 09:42:12PM -0500, Brian Finney wrote:
say we start with this number
123,456,789
one hundred
Jarkko Hietaniemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The desire to know the name of the runtime platform is a misdirected
desire.
What you really want to know is whether function Foo will be there,
what
kind of signature it has, whether file Bar will be there, what kind of
format it has, and so
John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote:
John Porter wrote:
But you need to remember it anyway, so remembering it for time() is
no added burden.
Uhm. NO! Remembering that $x+1 things have changed is an "added
burden"
over remembering that $x things have
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 04:38 PM 2/15/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
Yeah. Beginners. I was one too. And I remember always falling on
these...
But that's OK, since we probably don't want any new Perl
programmers...
I've skipped pretty much all this thread so far, but I
Steve Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Has anyone considered the problems associated with XS code, or
whatever
its replacement is?
Pardon my ignorance, but what's XS code?
Simply put (and paraphrastically, so don't nitpick, anyone), XS is using a
funky type of
yaphet jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Johan Vromans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed
Just Because We Can. Aspects which have proven usefulness and
are deeply engrained in the Perl
Nick, make a decision. As for myself, I won't sit back and watch this.
yaphet jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
despite all "cyber" appearances to the contrary, i'm one of you - but
who?
I've been looking back through my archives trying to figure out who you
are. You are certainly not someone
yaphet jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this is completely false when applied to real programming languages.
Please disclose what language you represent.
= example 1: php
= relatively easy to learn
. retains basic perl syntax
. less cryptic (but more verbose)
.
yaphet jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Feeding the troll:
careful with the troll talk: remember, your god's favorite book
is the "lord of the rings"...chock full of trolls...and hobbits, too!
= example 2: ruby
= now more popular than python in its native japan
Python isn't
[subject]: "It's funny. Laugh."
I know. I was having fun. We haven't had a lurktrollmuffin in here before
and it was a good diversion from the drollery of waiting...
'Sides, I happen to _like_ defending Perl from nonsensicals, especially
particularly abusive ones.
Simon Cozens [EMAIL
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:32:50 -0500 (EST), Sam Tregar wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Bart Lateur wrote:
Actually, it's pretty common. Only, most languages are not as
forgiving
as perl, and what is merely a warning in Perl, is a fatal error in
"David Grove" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Helton, Brandon" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please CC Otto in all replies concerning this topic. I want to make
sure
he
reads how wrong he is about Perl and its readability and I think
Simon
sums it
up perfec
OK, before this *completely* heads into the direction of advocacy,
which
it's dangerous close to anyway, you need to qualify that.
Uh, have you followed this thread? It's nothing but another perlbashing
session by a verbosity monger who can't handle $.
I tried to comment on "apocalypse" in Larry's most likely sense, but there
was a mail flub (now corrected).
Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq away
from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
revealing that which was previously unseen or
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:42:23AM +, David Grove wrote:
Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq
away
from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
revealing that which was previously
John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Whipp wrote:
A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to
program
in than some that do.
The obvious reply is: "There's more than one way to do it"
To which the obvious reply is:
'Although the Perl Slogan is
Given that Perl 5 internals post 5.004 caused the need for a rewrite
anyway, I'd imagine that this would be a particularly horrid idea. The
Perl 5 path is almost dead: adventurers and Win32 users are the vast
majority using it at all. Add Solaris 8 1/01 to the list of OS's that have
completely
I've been recently looking over the specification for C# and the .NET
platform (and falling for very little of the verbage: almost every line of
the first chapter of book I'm reading contains at least one oxymoron), and
am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of Perl 6 and
am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of
Perl 6 and the .NET platform.
. . . many things in .NET have been discussed similarly here.
That's because .NET attempts to address real-world issues.
The goals of .NET are not evil in and of themselves, you know.
Depends
-Original Message-
From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 5:26 PM
To: David Grove
Cc: Perl 6 Language Mailing List
Subject: Re: .NET
(still waiting
for something original for a change).
You are saying that the Clippy wasn't
Probably not if it had scales, webbed feet, a hookbill, antennae, a furry
coontail, and udders. Otherwise, if it looks like a camel at all, it's
considered a trademark violation. I remember someone (whether at O'Reilly or
not I don't remember) saying that, even if it looks like a horse but has a
Hungarian notation is any of a variety of standards for organizing
a computer program by selecting a schema for naming your variables
so that their type is readily available to someone familiar with
the notation.
I used to request hungarian notation from programmers who worked for me,
until
snip
sane indentation by making it part of the language, Perl is a
language that enforces a dialect of hungarian notation by making
its variable decorations an intrinsic part of the language.
But $, @, and % indicate data organization, not type...
Actually they do show type, though not
concerns : new mascot?
On Wed, 9 May 2001 10:24:26 -0400, David Grove wrote:
I remember someone (whether at O'Reilly or
not I don't remember) saying that, even if it looks like a horse
but has a
hump, it's not allowed. Or was that an alpaca with a llama...
The RFC pleads for a community
/me ponders the use of a cat in that context... Furball?
David T. Grove
Blue Square Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Apoc2 - STDIN
-Original Message-
From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: what I meant about hungarian notation
David Grove wrote:
$ is a singularity, @ is a multiplicity, and % is a
multiplicity of pairs
[...] subject to ethnic
cleansing. Culture wars arise spontaneously, but that should not deter
us from enabling people to build new cultures. [...]
Does that mean we can nuke Redmond and move on to reality in corporate IS
now?
};P
Core Perl is probably trademarked to Sun Microsystems. ;-)
David T. Grove
Blue Square Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: John L. Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 1:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Apoc2 -
As my Con Law professor was fond of saying, Horse hooey!*
Camel cookies.
;-)
These types of issues are not nearly so clear cut as many company's
would have people believe. E.g., O'Reilly is book publisher that
engages in the business of publishing and selling books for a
profit. They
-Original Message-
From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 8:01 AM
To: Dave Mitchell
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The 5% solution
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 10:19:10AM +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote:
to be such that the writing of the Perl 5 to
/me likes. /me likes a lot.
David T. Grove
Blue Square Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Dave Hartnoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 8:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Apoc2 - STDIN concerns : new mascot?
Nope, I still think most ordinary people want different operators for
strings than for numbers. Dictionaries and calculators have very
different interfaces in the real world, and it's false economy to
overgeneralize. Witness the travails of people trying to use
cell phones to type
-Original Message-
From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 11:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: what I meant about hungarian notation
Larry Wall wrote:
: do you think conflating @ and % would be a perl6 design win?
Nope, I still
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:55:36AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
If you talk that way, people are going to start believing it.
[snip]
Some of us are are talking that way because we already
beleive it. You can't make the transition from Attic
Greek to Koine without changing
-Original Message-
From: Adam Turoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 3:31 PM
To: David Goehrig
Cc: Larry Wall; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Perl, the new generation
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:13:13PM -0700, David Goehrig wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at
Well, I think we should take a step back and answer a few key questions:
1. Do we want to be able to use Perl 5 modules in a
Perl 6 program (without conversion)?
For a while, quite possibly, I'd say.
When 5.6 came out, I was in module hell, trying to get 5.005 modules to
compile
-Original Message-
From: Larry Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 6:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: On Vacation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: And about the whole
throwing-out-baby-in-one-grand-bathwater-disposal-motion
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 01:25:51PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
There must be some reason why a language like Sather isn't more popular.
I think that iters are part of the problem.
That smacks of the Politician's Syllogism:
Something is wrong.
This is something.
Therefore this
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 04:50:17PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
Pardon my indelicacy, but - Screw how it looks in Perl5.
I'm not telling you how it *looks* in Perl 5, I'm telling you (in Perl 5
terms) what it will *mean*.
nice save
p
--- Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser locale-aware so
it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
I thought that was in the list of things you'd need to take into
account when you wrote the parser... ;-P
That's not how I see it. The filehandle is naturally true if it
succeeds. It's the undef value that wants to have more information.
In fact, you could view $! as a poor-man's way of extracting the error
that was attached to the last undef.
If I were wealthy enough in time and patience to
David Grove writes:
: That's not how I see it. The filehandle is naturally true if it
: succeeds. It's the undef value that wants to have more information.
: In fact, you could view $! as a poor-man's way of extracting the error
: that was attached to the last undef.
:
: If I were
Where's the likes of David Grove when you need one?
I don't even know what you're talking about.
Leave me alone. I'm learning Python...
again.
p
-Original Message-
From: Vijay Singh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 10:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Python...
Python? Didn't know you were so into tuples...
I thought your head would be turned by Ruby ;-)
It is. But I'm
Perl is far more practical than experimental.
Not at the moment. That's the problem.
(Note the subtle subject change back to its original intent.)
p
Previously, on St. Elsewhere...
Simon(e) writes...
But of course, I'm sure you already know what makes
good language design, because otherwise you wouldn't
be mouthing off in here...
Why is it that Me is *mouthing off*, but you're not? Why is that?
What makes you so *special*? The
-Original Message-
From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 3:46 AM
To: Vijay Singh
Cc: Me; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Multi-dimensional arrays and relational db data
On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:13:28PM -0800, Vijay Singh wrote:
Why is it
If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is
the reason for
the confused-sounding nature of your email.
I would say Simon was the one ignoring an issue and attacking a
person, not
Vijay. I think Vijay was the one pointing out that this person (Me) was
contributing to
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
I would say Simon was the one ignoring an issue and attacking
a person, not
Vijay.
You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
messages: two of which are critical of Perl, two of which are pretty
-Original Message-
From: Bart Lateur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 10:48 AM
To: Perl 6 Language Mailing List
Subject: Re: Social Reform
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 08:54:13 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson
Well, I *have* been following the discussion. And to me, it looks indeed
like you, Simon, were indeed attacking ME on non-technical grounds.
Vijay just jumped in for him, like a lioness trying to protect her
kittens.
Which he does from time to time, as do most of us, myself likely
On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:31:22PM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
We can have a huge thread, just like before, but until we see any kind
of update from Larry as to if he has changed his mind it is all a bit
pointless.
For what it's worth, I like it.
Does anyone else see a problem with =~
Oh boo hoo. Might I suggest a good introductory Perl book?
p
On Saturday 28 July 2001 12:32, raptor wrote:
I've/m never used/ing elseif ( i hate it :) from the time I have to
edit a perl script of other person that had 25 pages non-stop if-elsif
sequence) ... never mind there is two
This makes no sense. ?: tests a boolean value, which is either true or false.
There is no ternary state for a boolean value. True/False, Yes/No, On/Off,
1/0. Are you suggesting Yes/No/Maybe? Or are you redefining True and False?
Doesn't matter. What you're asking has no counterpart in boolean
63 matches
Mail list logo
