On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 12:18:16 -0400
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
$z[0] = 50;
$z[2] = 20;
@x = @y[@z];
In your code, should @x contain (@y[50,0,20]) or (@y[50,20]) or
(@y[50,undef,20]) ?
@y[50,undef,20], which in Perl5 is @y[50,0,20].
An arbitrary and perhaps
On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 11:03:33 +1100 (EST)
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Real Damian is the Damian inside each of us.
You need to get in touch with your *own* inner Damian.
SETTING: Trendy bar.
DC: Hey, beautiful, how's it going? Say, do you have a little Damian in
you?
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:32:02 -0400
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great idea, as well as sqrt(-1) returning 1i istead of raising the
exception.
If we do them, yep. Currently no promises there.
If you do that, make sure it has to be enabled with a pragma. Having
complex numbers
I think Perl 6 should have a but keyword, as in:
if (defined $foo but $foo eq ) {
}
:-)
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 06:50:13 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 12:30:11PM +, Sam Vilain wrote:
I think Perl 6 should have a but keyword, as in:
if (defined $foo but $foo eq ) {
*scratches head*
so... it negates the left side, then ANDs it with the right
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
Sam No, but is syntactically equivalent to and in English. It just
Sam implies that the second condition is not generally what you'd
Sam expect if the first was true.
Maybe in the interest of huffman encoding, we could make it
even_though. :)
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An off-the-wall thought... If this is not the expected condition,
should it have the extra meaning of an assertion? For example,
could set $! to 'defined $foo but $foo eq ' and, if -w was in use,
issue 'warn Exceptional condition: $!'
Interesting idea;
people are happy that 5.005 is obsolete.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://sam.vilain.net/
7D74 2A09 B2D3 C30F F78E GPG: http://sam.vilain.net/sam.asc
278A A425 30A9 05B5 2F13
I regret to say that we of the FBI are powerless to act in cases of
oral-genital intimacy
, and we're still a long way from that.
In the very young field of programming, aren't we all ignorant amateurs?
Any programmer who doesn't know that they are ignorant are almost
certainly instead arrogant.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You're either part of the solution, or part of the precipitate
, Attributes, Methods and Associations. How many
of these elements does Perl deal in?
And don't take offence at being called an amateur - the word literally
means `for the love of it'.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thesaurus: ancient reptile with an excellent vocabulary
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:04, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 12:11:18PM +1300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This may sound like a silly idea but ...
Has anyone considered removing with the syntactic distinction between
numeric and string indexing -- that is, between array and
BAD: code that you have to rewrite if you change a key type
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A closed mouth says nothing wrong; a closed mind does nothing right.
- anon.
the concepts into the language :-).
my 2c.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I like a man who grins when he fights.
- Winston Churchill -
different, non-interchangable approaches to associating classes.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you think the United States has stood still, who built the
largest shopping center in the world?
RICHARD M NIXON
, then this enables this test. In Perl 5, the approach taken
with MI namespace clashes is to cross one's fingers ;).
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Understanding is a kind of ecstasy.
-- Carl Sagan
{ $car-owner-includes($joe) };
ok($@, Refs cannot behave like real Sets);
To make the last test work would need associations in the object core, I
think.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
you do it.
-- Mahatma Gandhi
approaches exist?
UML does not deal with persistence. It deals with specifying and modelling
objects.
I think that right now persistence fairly and squarely belongs outside of
Parrot :-).
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I dont have any solution, but I certainly admire the problem
with
this?
The paper appears to me to describe using serialisation of memory
structures to achieve persistence, which is another approach entirely.
Serialisation is good, but fails for more complicated memory structures.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The meek shall inherit the earth
a `method not defined'
error.
It just goes to show that MI is an ugly hack compared to using a servant
class. But that is not the point here; the point here is making good MI
semantics.
Sorry, know I said I'd shut up :-) But this is still too interesting ;-)
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED
, indicating that Directory objects are composed of
files.
Associations *are* fundamental object things. Presenting them in terms of
attributes is the real hack.
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It is necessary for me to establish a winner image. Therefore, I
have to beat somebody.
RICHARD M
. Speak now or hold
your peace for another generation of Perl. ]
--
Sam Vilain, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Two Commandments for the Molecular Age
1. Thou shalt not alter the consciousness of thy fellow men.
2. Thou shalt not prevent thy fellow man from altering his or her
own consciousness.
- Dr
On Sat, 08 Mar 2003 06:58, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 2:08 PM +1300 3/7/03, Sam Vilain wrote:
As long as mechanisms are put in place to allow modules to bypass
object encapsulation and private/public constraints, and given that
Parrot will have no XS,
It wouldn't be wise to jump from Parrot
Rod Adams wrote:
I do not believe that is possible.
This is the filtering or unification behavior that people keep
wanting junctions to have, which they do not.
Aww! But what about all the great problems that could be expressed
with them? I know of two languages that consider this to be a core
Rod Adams wrote:
And as one who recently proposed a way of getting Prolog like features
in Perl (through Rules, not Junctions), I understand the appeal
completely. Junctions are not the way to that goal. They are something
different.
Taking multiple values at once is what junctions are all
Aaron Sherman wrote:
Sam mugwump Vilain refers to each of these syntaxes as /Pod dialects/.
He is working on more formally defining the common model or AST that
these dialects map to.
Why? Seriously, why on earth do you want to encourage the proliferation
of variant markup languages?! There aren't
Damian Conway wrote:
[No, I'm not back; I'm just passing by. But I feel that I need to
comment on this whole issue]
Thanks! This message has lots of useful information that I would have
otherwise probably missed.
It seems that the basic premise of the POD document object model gels
well with
Darren Duncan wrote:
Now I seem to remember reading somewhere that '===' will do what I want,
but I'm now having trouble finding any mention of it.
So, what is the operator for reference comparison?
As someone who wrote a tool that uses refaddr() and 0+ in Perl 5 to
achieve the same thing, I
Luke Palmer wrote:
Supposing I had a doc trait, could I say:
sub f2c (Num $temp docTemperature in degrees F)
docConvert degress F to degrees C
{...}
Or would I be forced to spell it doc('stuff') ?
Well, first you need an `is` somewhere in there. And after that I think
you'll need
Juerd wrote:
According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
and 600 million people who have English as a second language. Should the
remaining ~5.5 billion humans be exluded from writing perl code just so that
we English speakers can understand all the code that is
Larry Wall wrote:
(B Well, only if you stick to a standard dialect. As soon as you start
(B defining your own macros, it gets a little trickier.
(B
(BInteresting, I hadn't considered that.
(B
(BHaving a quick browse through some of the discussions about macros, many
(Bof the macros I
Luke Palmer wrote:
`is pure` would be great to have! For possible auto-memoization of
likely-to-be-slow subs it can be useful, but it also makes great
documentation.
It's going in there whether Larry likes it or not[1]. There are so
incredibly many optimizations that you can do on pure functions,
Rod Adams wrote:
I would be dismayed if autothreading used threads to accomplish it's
goals. Simple iteration in a single interpreter should be more than
sufficient.
For sure. No point in doing 10_000 cycles to set up a scratch area
for a single boolean test that might take 10 cycles.
A
Rod Adams wrote:
It looks like I'm going to have to punt on finishing S29.
On behalf of pugs committers, we will gladly adopt this task, which is in
the pugs repository already at docs/S29draft.pod, as well as having a set
of foundation classes that correspond to all these object methods in
Rob Kinyon wrote:
If that's the case, then if I change a variable that isa Str (that isa
Num), does it change what it inherits from?
Please don't use inherits when talking about these core types. Classical
inheritance just doesn't work with the varied sets of numbers. All those
stories you were
Larry Wall wrote:
: pugs '1.28' * '2.56'
: 3.2768
: What is (or should be) going on here here?
: [1] role NumRole {
: method infix:* returns Num (NumRole $x, NumRole $y: ) { ... }
: }
: Str.does(NumRole);
: [3] multi sub prefix:+ (Str $x) returns Num { ... }
: multi sub
Luke Palmer wrote:
And how do I explicitly define the precedence?
Using the `tighter`, `looser`, and `equiv` traits. You specify
precedence in terms of the precedence of other existing ops.
sub infix:.(f, g) is looser(infix:+) {...}
This is interesting. So, infix: is similar to Haskell's
()
Edward Cherlin wrote:
Here is the last answer from Ken Iverson, who invented reduce in
the 1950s, and died recently.
file:///usr/share/j504/system/extras/help/dictionary/intro28.htm
[snip]
Thanks for bringing in a little history to the discussion. Those links
are all local to your system; do
Stuart Cook wrote:
In Haskell, there is a distinction between foldl and foldl1 (similar
remarks apply to foldr/foldr1[1]):
The former (foldl) requires you to give an explicit 'left unit'[2],
which is implicitly added to the left of the list being reduced. This
means that folding an empty list will
Edward Cherlin wrote:
There was a discussion of the principal value of square root on
this list some time back, making the point that for positive
[...]
It turns out that the domain and range and the location of the
cut lines have to be worked out separately for different
functions.
Mark Overmeer wrote:
'uniq' differs from 'sort' because there is no order relationship between
the elements. A quick algorithm for finding the unique elements in perl5
is
sub uniq(@)
{ my %h = map { ($_ = 1) } @elements;
keys %h;
}
...and an even quicker one is:
use Set::Object;
Hi all,
While trying to convert Haskell statements like this to Perl 6:
data Cxt = CxtVoid -- ^ Context that isn't expecting any values
| CxtItem !Type -- ^ Context expecting a value of the specified type
| CxtSlurpy !Type -- ^ Context expecting multiple values of
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
The continuing exchanges regarding junctions, and the ongoing tendency
by newcomers to think of them and try to use them as sets, makes
me feel that it might be worthwhile to define and publish a standard
CSet class and operations sooner rather than later in Perl 6
Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
Are signatures going to be an exposed first class object in Perl 6?
I hope so, too.
~foo.signature;
# Signature objects should stringify to a canonized form, e.g.:
# ~sub (Str $bar, CoolClass $z where {...}) {...}.signature ==
# 'Str $bar, ANONCLASS(0xDEADBEEF)'
Yuval Kogman wrote:
We already have the Set class, how do we say what it contains?
class Set {
has $.type;
method members returns $.type () { ... }
}
my Set of Int $s = Set.new; # is this how you call it?
You are describing Higher Order types, also called Generic Algebraic Data
Rob Kinyon wrote:
I would love to see a document (one per editor) that describes the
Unicode characters in use and how to make them. The Set implementation
in Pugs uses (at last count) 20 different Unicode characters as
operators.
I have updated the unicode quickref, and started a Perlmonks
Rob Kinyon wrote:
What I'm trying to get at isn't that DateTime's API should be
preserved. I'm saying that the concept of DateTime should be ported.
Core or not core - it doesn't matter. When use'd (or installed), it
should override now() (and anyone else we can think of) to return an
object
Rod Adams wrote:
How do I specify the signature of a context-sensitive function?
sub foo() returns (what?) {
return want ~~ Scalar ?? cheap_integer_result :: List_of_Sheep;
}
I suspect a typed junction would look like : Junction of Int|Str.
Not quite. AIUI that means a
Fagyal Csongor wrote:
With all respect, I think this is a very important thing which needs
attention, and I hope that you will help us to clarify the situation. I
am pretty sure Dan did not leave because he had a bad day - we know he
Dan's position was very stressful, he had people from all
Damian Conway wrote:
What you want is:
$product = ([*] @values err 0);
Or:
$factorial = ([*] 1..$n err 1);
The err operator bind only to the point on the instruction it is
attached to, ie it's not a shortcut for eval(), right?
I'm just seeing some edge cases here for custom defined
Luke Palmer wrote:
and still don't make sense as reduce operators. Observe the table:
# of args | Return (type)
0 | -Inf
1 | Num (the argument)
2 | bool
... | bool
Let's look at the type of one of the many `reduce'
TSa (Thomas Sandla) wrote:
I'm not sure but Perl6 could do better or at least trickier ;)
Let's assume that = = when chained return an accumulated
boolean and the least or greatest value where the condition was
true. E.g.
0 2 3 returns 0 but true
1 2 1 returns 1 but false
4 5
From S10;
In any case, there is no longer any magical $AUTOLOAD variable. The
name being declared or defined can be found in $_ instead. The name
does not include the package name. You can always get your own package
name with $?PACKAGENAME.
So, what is the prototype of AUTOLOAD? It is
Juerd wrote:
I think there exists an even simpler way to avoid any mess involved.
Instead of letting AUTOLOAD receive and pass on arguments, and instead
of letting AUTOLOAD call the loaded sub, why not have AUTOLOAD do its
thing, and then have *perl* call the sub?
sub AUTOLOAD ($w) { return
chromatic wrote:
Who says AUTOLOAD will always either call a loaded sub or fail?
Maybe it should be passed a continuation too, then? Then it could
choose exactly what to do with it.
Sam.
OK, that last discussion was productive, but I think we all (including
myself) overlooked the fact that the AUTOLOAD and AUTOSUB methods are
implied to have different calling conventions;
There is still an AUTOLOAD hook that behaves as in Perl 5.
The (AUTO*) routines are expected to return
Rod Adams wrote:
I never liked the idea of out-of-band arguments. Either something is
passed, is available due to being in a broader scope, or can be gleamed
from introspection.
ok. First of all, I agree with the basic sentiment.
However, to play devil's advocate and re-interpret what you
To me it is a trivial case that you want to provide a fake attribute
which for all intents and purposes behaves exactly like there was a real
attribute there, backing against another attribute.
A Date object is a classic example of this; you want to provide 0-based
and 1-based attributes, which
Sam Vilain wrote:
To me it is a trivial case that you want to provide a fake attribute
which for all intents and purposes behaves exactly like there was a real
attribute there, backing against another attribute.
A Date object is a classic example of this; you want to provide 0-based
and 1-based
Piers Cawley wrote:
For myself, I'd like to see AUTOLOAD with a signature along the lines of:
sub AUTOLOAD (Symbol $sym, ArgumentCollection $args, Continuation $cc)
returns (Code | Pair)
{
...
}
This presupposes a deal of support infrastructure, but also provides
flexibility.
Yuval Kogman wrote:
As I understand it SMD is now not much more than a mechanism to
place a constraint on the MMD, saying that there can only be one
method or subroutine with the same short name.
Why is this the default?
Otherwise you lose this quite useful warning if the signatures didn't
Hey Tim.
I've kept an eye on Perl 6 and Parrot developments but I'm no expert in
either. What I'd like *you* to do is make proposals (ideally fairly
detailed proposals, but vague ideas are okay) for what a Perl 6 DBI API
should look like.
Keep in mind that the role of the DBI is to provide
Richard Nuttall wrote:
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard
Darren Duncan wrote:
3. Redefine prepare() and execute() such that the first is expressly for
activities that can be done apart from a database (and hence can also be
done for a connection handle that is closed at the time) while all
activities that require database interaction are deferred to
Darren Duncan wrote:
Okay, considering that using the same name prepare() like this may
confuse some people, here is a refined solution that uses 3 methods
instead; please disregard any contrary statements that I previously made:
I think I'm beginning to like it.
Allow me to suggest one or
Darren Duncan wrote:
Actually, there was a big oversight in my last message. It does not
handle approximate or relative dates, such as when you don't know the
details.
FWIW, this is handled by DateTime::Incomplete, and also will be natively
supported by Date::Gregorian.
You're describing
Craig DeForest wrote:
Using the TAI epoch of 1958-01-01 00:00:00 has several advantages:
- TAI is recognized by international standards-setting bodies (BIPM).
- Perl6 will then shake out the 31-bit time rollover a full 12 years before
I like this in principle, however I wonder of the
Maxim Sloyko wrote:
But this is not the point. The point was that usage of some file with
passwords by *DEFAULT* is not the way to go, IMHO. It raises more
problems than it solves.
Can you give an example of such a problem that wasn't already there?
Just to be clear, the file would only
Piers Cawley wrote:
Then the harness that actually sets up the application would simply do
use Logger::DBI :dsn..., :user..., :password
and Logger::DBI would install itself as the default Logger class.
The question is, how does one write Injected to make this work? Or what
features do we
Darren Duncan wrote:
I should emphasize that I never expected to be able to send any type of
ASTs over the pipe to the database. They would still be interpreted by
the database driver for Perl and/or a wrapper thereon, into the database
native format. Its just that, to an application, it
Dean Arnold wrote:
RE: LOBs and SQL Parse Trees: having recently implemented
LOB support for a JDBC driver (and soon for a DBD), I can assure
you that SQL parse trees are unneeded to support them. For databases
Great!
Perhaps you can shed some light on how to do it for this, then.
SQL
Yuval Kogman wrote:
By the way, a nice use case for using the rules engine could be
parsing a stream of SAX events into a structure... XML::Simple in
perl6 could be really as simple as it sounds =)
Can anyone see this being retrofitted on top of current rules
semantics? How does PGE relate to
Dean Arnold wrote:
Column 3 is a BYTEA column in Pg and needs special peppering to work.
What sort of peppering ? DBI provides SQL_BLOB, and SQL_CLOB
type descriptors (as well as SQL_BLOB_LOCATOR and SQL_CLOB_LOCATOR), so
presumably DBD::Pg (or any other DBD supporting LOBs) provides the
logic
Larry Wall wrote:
In addition to what chromatic said, I'd like to point out that you've
got the abstraction levels backwards by my lights: these days I
tend to think of the class as a restricted form of role. A class is
restricted to having to provide a working interface to real objects.
Can
Yuval Kogman wrote:
everyone gets to choose, and another thing I have in mind is the
Transactional role...
DBI::Handle does Transactional;
To the STM rollbacker and type checker thingy this means that any IO
performed by DBI::Handle invoked code is OK - it can be reversed
using the
Say I make an accessor method for an attribute that doesn't really
'exist'.
For instance, a good example of this is the month_0 vs month
properties on a date object; I want to make both look equivalent as
real properties, but without the users of the class knowing which
one is the real one.
Larry Wall wrote:
Users of the class includes people subclassing the class, so to them
they need to be able to use $.month_0 and $.month, even though there
is no has $.month_0 declared in the Class implementation, only
has $.month.
We thought about defining the attribute variables that
Piers Cawley wrote:
Users of the class includes people subclassing the class, so to them
they need to be able to use $.month_0 and $.month, even though there
is no has $.month_0 declared in the Class implementation, only
has $.month.
We thought about defining the attribute variables
Larry Wall wrote:
: Do the following exist then:
:has @x; # private, lexically scoped
[...]
:has %y; # private, lexically scoped
[...]
Yes, the sigil is fairly orthogonal to all this, hopefully.
Yes, for isn't the sigil just a compact form of saying does Hash or
does Array ? (as
Yuval Kogman wrote:
everyone gets to choose, and another thing I have in mind is the
Transactional role...
DBI::Handle does Transactional;
To the STM rollbacker and type checker thingy this means that any IO
performed by DBI::Handle invoked code is OK - it can be reversed
using the
chromatic wrote:
A12 and S12 describe introspection on objects and classes. The
metaclass instance has the method getmethods() which returns method
descriptors. The design specifies several traits queryable through
these descriptors.
[...]
Currently, there's no way to query these traits
Piers Cawley wrote:
Let's say I have a class, call it Foo which has a bunch of attributes, and I've
created a few of them. Then, at runtime I do:
eval 'class Foo { has $.a_new_attribute is :default10 }';
Assuming I've got the syntax right for defaulting an attribute, and lets assume
I have,
Stevan Little wrote:
This is extended into the other sigil types;
has %.foo;
is sugar for this:
has Hash $foo; # or has %foo, but really, the point is it's
# an implementation detail, right?
method foo is rw {
return Proxy.new( :FETCH{ $foo }, # or a facade
On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 21:00 -0400, Joe Gottman wrote:
Will there be an operator for symmetric difference? I nominate (^).
That makes sense, although bear in mind that the existing Set module for
Perl 6, and the Set::Scalar and Set::Object modules for Perl 5 use % for
this (largely due to
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 16:33 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: I would assume that you would choose time 0.0 = Jan 1, 2000 at 00:00:00.0
: TAI (December 31, 1999 at 23:59:29.0 UTC), making the whole thing free of
: any UTC interferences. But there is an argument for making the zero point a
:
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 22:24 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: That's my leaning--if I thought it might encourage the abandonment of
: civil leap seconds, I'd be glad to nail it to Jan 1, 2000, 00:00:00.0 UTC.
: If we're going with TAI, can't we just nail it to the epoch it defines,
: instead?
On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 01:28 -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
Why on earth would you want to encourage such a short sighted
programming practise? The earth wobbles like a spinning top. In fact
It's hardly short sighted to want leap seconds to be abandoned (not in
Perl but world wide). The few
Hi all,
Is it intentional that S09 lists unboxed complex types, but equivalent
Boxed types are missing from the Types section in S06?
Sam.
On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 08:45 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
More info. ¢T is a scalar variable just like $T, but enforces a
class view, so you can use it as a class parameter, and pass any
object to it, but only access the classish aspects of the object.
The only other big difference is that you can
On Sat, 2005-10-29 at 17:30 -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
However, it could also be that the creator of Foo did not intend for
subclasses to be able to Just Work, and that the whole idea of Foo
is to do a Template Method style pattern in which subclasses must
implement the
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 11:46 -0700, John Williams wrote:
It is not so much an operator, as it is a subroutine with really strange
syntax, and the side-effect of changing the $_ variable. You need to use
an operator to get it to affect a different variable.
operators _are_ subroutines. There
On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 09:03 -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
I think the difference comes from the Principle of Least Surprise. The
various operators being discussed in this thread are all operators
which are in languages that have common use - C, C++, Java, the .Net
stack, etc. Regexen and the
On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 13:10 -0500, Mike Li wrote:
what is a good translation of the following C into perl6?
code
[...]
int x = 0; int y[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}; y[x++]++; /* line
that matters */
[...]
/code
in perl5, i would've written something like:
code
my $x = 0; my @y =
On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 17:16 +0100, Ron Blaschke wrote:
The Free Lunch Is Over: A Fundamental Turn Toward Concurrency in Software.
[1] He starts with The biggest sea change in software development since
the OO revolution is knocking at the door, and its name is Concurrency.
Perhaps have a read
On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 17:27 -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
3. A flag that says we know that some operation failed, such as would
be exploited in the failing-expr err deal-with-it-or-die
situations.
This concept is like an exception which isn't thrown but returned.
Dropping an exception,
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.
Damian Conway wrote:
I'm not enamoured of the .# I must confess. Nor of the #. either. I wonder
whether we need the dot at all. Or, indeed, the full power of arbitrary
delimiters after the octothorpe.
Agreed.
What if we restricted the delimiters to the five types of balanced brackets?
Larry Wall wrote:
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 12:26:13PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
: This does mean that if you comment out blocks with s/^/#/, you mess up on:
:
: #sub foo
: #{
: # if foo { }
: #}
Well, actually, that still works.
Oh, true :-)
But this fragment dies:
#sub foo
#{
# bar
Larry Wall wrote:
: But this fragment dies:
:
: #sub foo
: #{
: # bar { } unless baz
: #}
I don't see how that's different at all from the first example.
“#sub foo” is parsed as a comment token
“#{
# bar { }” is the next comment token
then we get “unless baz”
Unless you are balancing
Darren Duncan wrote:
Speaking a little more technically, a Relation has 2 main components,
its heading and its body. The heading is a set of 0..N keys (called
attributes in relation-land), and the body is a set of 0..N
Mappings (called tuples in relation-land), where they set of keys
of each
Darren Duncan wrote:
Is there a reference for the meaning of these methods?
There are many written references to these methods; just type
relational algebra into Google.
I will add that the first hit on such a search, the Wikipedia page on
relational algebra (
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
