On Feb 21, 2015, at 2:45 AM, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote:
Hi Darren,
On 21.02.2015 08:51, Darren Duncan wrote:
I notice from looking at http://design.perl6.org/S02.html that Blob is
listed
both as being a role and as a type. See
http://design.perl6.org/S02.html#Roles
On Dec 21, 2013, at 12:00 AM, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote:
On 12/20/2013 04:52 AM, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
OK x not xx.
The doubling of operators is confusing.
OTOH having a single operator which two different meanings is also confusing
(and very un-perlish).
Sometimes,
On Nov 4, 2013, at 12:19 AM, GitHub nore...@github.com wrote:
Branch: refs/heads/master
Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs
Commit: 9c428a98d060811fa086d3168321cfe437be695a
https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/9c428a98d060811fa086d3168321cfe437be695a
Author: Elizabeth
On Aug 23, 2013, at 2:41 AM, Steve Pitchford steve.pitchf...@gmail.com wrote:
How would you implement, in a robust way, the following things:
1 kg + 1 kg = 2 kg
2 m * 3 m = 6 m^2
5 kg * (3 m/s)^2 = 45 J
The answer is that you wouldn't - the problem domain is so vague as to be
My understanding is if you want to count by threes, starting at 2 and ending at
14, you should be able to write:
2, 5 ... 14
That is, the list-building operator looks at the previous two or three terms
preceding it to determine where to start and what step function to use, and
then looks
What I want to know is whether there's a way to define a step function that's
based in part or in whole on the current term's index. For example, how would
I use infix:... to generate the perfect squares between 0 and 100? Namely,
'0,1,4,9,16,25,36,49,64,81,100'. For example, is Perl 6 set
Why must we use 'submethod BUILD' instead of 'method BUILD'? Is it some sort
of chicken-and-egg dilemma?
Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
And this contradiction – that being able to declare sugar is
good, but the way that languages have permitted that so far leads
to insanity – is what sent me thinking along the lines that there
has to be some way to make overloading sane. And we all know that
+Despite the appearance as a subscripting form, these names are resolved
+not at run time but at compile time. The pseudo-subscripts need not
+be simple scalars. These are extended with the same two-element list:
+
+infix:?? !!
+infix:['??','!!']
Huh. I thought that
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.podTue Feb 5 09:55:29 2008
@@ -2791,7 +2791,7 @@
are insufficient for defining the pecking order of code. Note that
you can bind to either a bare block or a pointy block. Binding to a
bare block conveniently leaves the topic in C$_, so the final form
Larry Wall wrote:
: Is it forbidden to use placeholder parameters in conjunction with
: my? Or would it simply not do anything useful? I ask because Do
: what I mean would seem to imply that 'my Dog $^foo' would specify
: $^foo's type as 'Dog'. Though if you start doing too much of that,
:
Larry Wall wrote:
Any other cute ideas?
If you have '\s', you'll also want '\S':
$n cat\s fight\S # 1 cat fights; 2 cats fight
I'm not fond of the 'ox\soxen' idea; but I could get behind something
like '\sox oxen' or 'ox\sen'.
'\sa b' would mean 'a is singular; b is plural'
'\sa' would be
Gianni Ceccarelli wrote:
Please don't put this in the language. The problem is harder than it
seems (there are European languages that pluralize differently on $X %
10, IIRC; 0 is singular or plural depending on the language, etc etc).
-snip-
I know Perl is not minimal, but sometimes I feel
Yuval Kogman wrote:
You can subclass the grammar and change everything.
Theoretically that's a yes =)
Right. One last question: is this (i.e., extending a string's
grammar) a keep simple things simple thing, or a keep difficult
things doable thing?
--
Jonathan Dataweaver Lang
Thom Boyer wrote:
The enumerations and the numerical values are both in correct order.
Since abc is less than xyz, abc cmp xyz is being invoked with
its arguments in increasing order, So it returns Order::Increase. That
numifies to -1 because that's how less-than is usually encoded.
Others
Ovid wrote:
If I call this:
if $class.^can('wibble') { ... }
Does Perl 6 return false if that's only an instance method? Will the
WALK iterator returned by .^can return references to instance methods?
As I understand it, Perl 6 generally doesn't bother with the
class-vs-instance
Dave Whipp wrote:
The tests in S02 LS02/Literal/In order to interpolate an entire hash
appear to assume that an interpolated hash renders its keys in a sorted
order. But this property doesn't seem to be stated in the text. Is it
true that the keys are always sorted for interpolation? (is it
Joe Gottman wrote:
On the other hand, this being Perl, I do believe it should be easy to
specify the concurrent case. I think that a forall keyword (and a
givenall keyword corresponding to given) would be a good idea.
These would not be quite parallel to for and given because there
would
Dave Whipp wrote:
No, you're not the only person thinking Occam ... though I should point
out that none of my suggestions are par blocks -- a par block made
every statement within the block execute in parallel with the other
statements in that block (much like a Verilog fork/join pair).
No;
Larry Wall wrote:
I (impersonally) believe that hyper context is the right solution to
this because context can propagate to where it needs to dynamically.
As for the fact that it's not the default list context for for,
that could easily be changed with a pragma. Maybe that could even
be the
Paul Hodges wrote:
http://perl6.org/doc/design/syn/S02.html still says:
Intra-line comments will not be supported in standard Perl
This is wrong, since S02 also defines intra-line comments, under
Whitespace and Comments. It calls them 'embedded comments'. You
don't need a 'use' statement.
I've been putting a fair amount of thought into this. Here's what
I've come up with:
Perl 6 has several instances where whitespace is required or forbidden
in order to better facilitate Do What I Mean programming: for
instance, by having the presence or absence of whitespace before curly
braces
Jonathan Lang wrote:
How about '~#', meaning something along the lines of string-like
comment? The idea is that the syntax that follows this would conform
closely to that of string literals (i.e., quotes). We might even
consider loosening the restrictions on delimiter characters, allowing
Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
On 30/12/2007, Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only wart
is that '#( ... )' cannot begin at the very start of a line; but it's
easy enough to get around that restriction - say, with some leading
whitespace.
Thanks for the reply - can you please what
Offer Kaye wrote:
#( commenting out a large code section, yey for Perl6 multi-line comments...
if ($foo) {
print ...or not :(\n
}
) # this should have been the end of the embedded comment
...and since it wasn't, you probably should have chosen other brackets such as:
#[[
I'm thinking aloud here, so please bear with me.
A number of languages have a with ... construct that's intended to
cut down on repetitive typing, by factoring the invocant out of every
method call. Perl 6 also has this, in the form of given ...:
given $foo.bar.baz {
.dothis();
Dave Whipp wrote:
If the construct is used only rarely then it should have a longer name,
Actually, Huffman coding implies that if the construct is used
regularly then it should have a short name. It does not mandate a
long name for rare constructs; it merely says that if a given short
name is
Ryan Richter wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
and so on, you might do something like:
with qq :(c = false) {
I think this can be done with normal currying, something like
temp circumfix: := quote:qq.assuming(:!c);
That handles the specific example that I had in mind, but does so
Another thing to note about given ... when: you don't have to use them
together. All that given does is to set $_ to the variable
provided; this can be used in a manner similar to with statements in
other languages. And when doesn't have to be inside a given
block, either: it can be used in any
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
How do C and C differ with respect to backtracking? For instance,
foobar ~~ / [a..z]+ [ ... ] /;
Both sides of the C happen in parallel, so I would guess that they
both match foo then stop. Please correct me if that's wrong.
As written, this match would
So 'orelse' is exactly like '//', except that the result of the left
side gets passed to the right side as an error message. Is there a
reason to make this exception, as opposed to altering '//' to behave
exactly like 'orelse' does?
--
Jonathan Dataweaver Lang
Larry Wall wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
: So 'orelse' is exactly like '//', except that the result of the left
: side gets passed to the right side as an error message. Is there a
: reason to make this exception, as opposed to altering '//' to behave
: exactly like 'orelse' does?
How 'bout
Admittedly, that wasn't particularly germane to the perl6 mailing
list; but it did bring up an issue that's been bothering me for a
while.
I would like to see Perl6 handle the equivalent of IPC::Open2 using
the same sort of syntax and semantics that it uses for sockets, by
default. That is, I'd
David Green wrote:
(Unless I'm missing something, which is always possible; you can put
a piece of POD geographically next to a Perl declaration, but I'm not
sure that's unambiguous enough. Hm, why not? POD doesn't know
what's going on around it, but Perl does, and could say, I've just
Mark Overmeer wrote:
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070622 09:02]:
Mark Overmeer wrote:
Then, when you want to add some docs to the method, to help the
correct use, add it, for instance like:
method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
` Check wether the
OK. After much thinking on the subject, here are my recommendations:
First: give Pod the ability to delimit blocks of ambient text, e.g.:
=text
class Foo {
has $bar;
}
=stop
'=text' and '=stop' would be considered to be separate but related
single-line Pod Sections, so Pod-stripping
In [svn:perl6-synopsis] r14421 - doc/trunk/design/syn,
Damian Conway wrote:
brian wrote:
So, if this is the case, how will a new Perl 6 user debug a program
failure when part of their program mysteriously disappears because
they just happened to have =begin at the beginning of a line?
The
brian d foy wrote:
Whereas the rule you have to teach under the Integration model is:
We don't teach any rule under this model, and it's been fine for over a
decade :)
When we do teach the current Pod, the simple rule is that Pod starts:
* when Perl is expecting a new statement
* there
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Which is not to say that there isn't a time and place when ease of
implementation should trump ease of programming; taking an extreme
example, being able to write a program that consists of the single
line:
attend my every wish
is the ultimate in terms of ease
Larry Wall wrote:
I have a problem with both extremes, and I want to solve it with a dose
of postmodern apathy. It may seem a bit insane, but I think that in
print qq:to/END/
=for whatever
END
I would prefer that the =for is considered Pod by any standard Pod
parser, but is
I'm going to stay away from the POD referencing Perl debate for the
time being. Instead, a couple of thoughts:
1. It has always been my understanding that comments intimately relate
to documentation, despite being part of Perl's syntax. As such, they
are a technical violation of this
Larry Wall wrote:
So I think a named reference is a good compromise, where the name in
the documentation (in some easily recognized syntactic form) refers
to the next declaration (or set of declarations) of that same name.
Hopefully the pod either knows implicitly or has been told explicitly
how
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+Block comments may be nested within other block comments (with the
+same or differing brackets). POD comments may also be nested within
+block comments. (These are still visible to the POD parser; if you
+wish to comment out a block of mixed POD and Perl 6 code,
Charles Bailey wrote:
I'm concerned that the relevant precedent isn't just Perl5. The ?: spelling
of the ternary is pretty deeply embedded in programming languages -- I'm
hard pressed to think of a widely used language in the past 10-15 years that
spells it differently (though that may say more
Audrey Tang wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
A variation of chaining associativity gets
used, with the chaining rule being '$v1 op1 $v2 // $v1 op2 $v3'
instead of '$v1 op1 $v2 $v2 op2 $v3', as is the case for comparison
chaining.
But wouldn't that make:
True ?? undef !! Moose;
evaluate
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Besides ?? !! with out an else part is just .
No, it isn't. While behaves properly when the condition turns out
to be true, the result of the condition turning out to be false is
whatever the condition turned out to be.
Still, Damian has a good point - which renders
Rereading A03, I ran across the original reasoning behind why Perl 5's
'?:' trinary operator became '?? ::' first, and then '?? !!'. Three
reasons were given:
* the '?' and ':' tokens are far too broadly useful to be gobbled up
by the trinary operator.
* the doubled symbols bring to mind the
Larry Wall wrote:
: * In item context, a list of captures becomes a single Array object,
: and the question about whether or not it gets flattened gets deferred
: until its contents get looked at in list, slice, or hash context.
That's the intent. $() used to assume @@ inside till this latest
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Arguably list should be non-committal and we give
@() a different name like flat, but that grates in my brain for
some reason, if only because most list contexts would in the end
be flat anyway. And list in English already implies something
flatter than, say
Chas Owens wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Chas Owens wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Is there any reason why we can't simply define '$a x $n' as being
shorthand for 'cat($a xx $n)'? In what way does the former differ
from the latter, other than the use of a Whatever in place of $n
Chas Owens wrote:
I am almost certain that the following code is in list context.
pugs my @a = '-' x 5, 'foo', '-' x 5;
pugs @a
(-, foo, -)
pugs my @b = cat('-' xx 5), 'foo', cat('-' xx 5)
(-, -, -, -, -, foo, -, -, -, -, -)
However, it does seem that Pug's version of cat does not
Mark J. Reed wrote:
Is item context what we're calling scalar these days, or something else?
According to S03, it does indeed appear that item context is the
current terminology for what perl 5 called scalar context:
The item contextualizer
item foo()
The new name for Perl 5's scalar
a really
compelling reason.
...with x always corresponding to the first and xx always
corresponding to the second, right? In essence, x always produces a
string, while xx always produces a list.
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Personally, I would tend to favor the notion that infix:x always
produces
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: larry
Date: Sun Jun 3 17:23:15 2007
New Revision: 14415
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
typo from Aaron Crane++
s/cat/list/ for flattening captures in order
cat() now only produces
Is there any reason why we can't simply define '$a x $n' as being
shorthand for 'cat($a xx $n)'? In what way does the former differ
from the latter, other than the use of a Whatever in place of $n?
--
Jonathan Dataweaver Lang
Chas Owens wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Is there any reason why we can't simply define '$a x $n' as being
shorthand for 'cat($a xx $n)'? In what way does the former differ
from the latter, other than the use of a Whatever in place of $n?
$a x $n is equivalent to join '', $a xx $n
I just went through all of the synopses searching for instances where
[-1] is still being referenced in its perl5 sense; the following
patches update them to correct perl6 syntax. I also took the liberty
of fixing up a markup glitch in S03.pod.
=begin S02
@@ -1379,7 +1379,7 @@
=item *
-The
Darren Duncan wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
I see no mention of C@@x in this section. I would assume that
C@@x may be bound to any object that does the CMultidimensional
role, with a note to the effect that the CMultidimensional role does
the CPositional role (and thus anything that C@x may
Perhaps it's better to think of '@' and '@@' as working with different
contexts. S02 says that there are three main contexts (void, scalar,
and list); that scalar context has a number of sub-contexts
(boolean, integer, number, and string), and that list context has a
number of sub-contexts based
Larry Wall wrote:
Well, it's already too easy, but the problem I have with it is not
that. My problem is that sigil:@ is the name of a very specific
syntactic notion, while Positional is the name of a very generic
semantic notion. I don't think those levels should be confused.
Fair enough.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sigils indicate overall interface, not the exact type of the bound
+object. Different sigils imply different minimal abilities.
I see no mention of C@@x in this section. I would assume that
C@@x may be bound to any object that does the CMultidimensional
role, with a
From S02:
--
Perl 6 includes a system of Bsigils to mark the fundamental
structural type of a variable:
$ scalar (object)
@ ordered array
% unordered hash (associative array)
code/rule/token/regex
:: package/module/class/role/subset/enum/type/grammar
@@ multislice
Some additional suggestions for S02:
--
@@ -740,9 +740,9 @@
Range A pair of Ordered endpoints; gens immutables when iterated
Set Unordered group of values that allows no duplicates
Bag Unordered group of values that allows duplicates
-JunctionSets with
Larry Wall wrote:
Dave Whipp wrote:
: A slightly tangental thought: is the behavior of Cgiven with no block
: defined? I.e. is
It would be illegal syntax currently.
As I understand it, the proposal is to say that if the parser finds a
';' where it was expecting to find a control block, it
gabriele renzi wrote:
Hi everyone,
I don't want to argue about the design of perl6, I just wonder: why
the semicolon is still needed in the end of lines in perl6?
It isn't - sometimes. S03 identifies a number of ways that an
expression can be terminated: the semicolon (';'), a block-final
Good examples. Now could you provide some to explain to me why it's
important to distinguish between '$', '@', '%', and ''? I ask
because I've seen a lot of object-based code that has said stuff like
'$container{$key}'; it seems that there's an assumption that $foo can
be used as a list, a
Jonathan Lang wrote:
^[3]: If this were included in the core, you might even reverse things
so that ';' is defined in terms of postfix:. or infix:{'=='},
depending on the context; in this case, postfix:? would be defined
in terms of postfix:., rather than postfix:;. In fact, the only
thing
Mark J. Reed wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Good examples. Now could you provide some to explain to me why it's
important to distinguish between '$', '@', '%', and ''? I ask
because I've seen a lot of object-based code that has said stuff like
'$container{$key}';
Well, $container{$key
On 5/14/07, Daniel Hulme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:29:11PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
2. This brings up the possibility of custom-designed termination
operators.
cf. Semi::Semicolons.
Close. I'm thinking added functionality for semicolon alternatives
rather than
On 5/1/07, brian d foy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was thinking about default filehandles yesterday. select() doesn't
seem to be around except as an Unfiled function in S16.
Then, as I was looking at
.say( Hello World );
At various times, I have seen something to the effect of each of the
Larry Wall wrote:
The fundamental problem here is that we're forcing a method name to be
represented as a string. We're basically missing the foo equivalent
for methods. Maybe we need to allow the indirection on method names
too:
if $obj.fribble:(Str -- BadPoet) {
Takes a little
Larry Wall wrote:
Maybe we need to allow the indirection on method names too:
if $obj.fribble:(Str -- BadPoet) {
-snip-
Note that we already define foo:(Int, Str) to return a list of candidates
if there's more than one, so extending this from the multi dispatcher
to the single
Ovid wrote:
My apologies if these have been answered. I've been chatting with
Jonathan Worthington about some of this and any misconceptions are
mine, not his.
In reading through S12, I see that .can() returns an iterator for the
methods matched. What I'm curious about is this:
if
Luke Palmer wrote:
These things are methods, and I'm not sure why we've crammed them into
smart match. Things like :M have nothing to do with matching. What
would it mean if smart match returned false? This file has not been
modified ever? :e has a bit more merit for a smart match, but the
brian d foy wrote:
As I was playing around with dirhandles, I thought What if... (which
is actualy sorta fun to do in Pugs, where Perl 5 has everything
documented somewhere even if nobody has read it).
My goal is modest: explain fewer things in the Llama. If dirhandles
were like filehandles,
Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Also: why distinguish between open and opendir? If the string is
the name of a file, 'open' means open the file; if it is the name of
a directory, 'open' means open the directory. If it's the name of a
pipe, it opens the pipe. And so
Uri Guttman wrote:
JL == Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JL Please. I've always found the opendir ... readdir ... closedir set
JL to be clunky.
JL Also: why distinguish between open and opendir? If the string is
JL the name of a file, 'open' means open the file
Generalize the negated relational operators to apply to any infix
operator that returns a boolean. In terms of the standard operators,
this will add || ^^ // and or xor err to the family that is
implicitly equipped with logical negations.
For consistency's sake, you may also want to define
Inspired by the new array indexing syntax from S09.
Modify S03 (under Range Semantics) so that if a Range is operating
in a bounded space, a 'whatever' star as the starting or ending point
maps to the lower or upper bound:
my enum Months «:Jan(1) Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec»
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+Arrays may also be defined with a mixture of fixed and autoextending
+dimensions:
+
+my @calendar[12;*;24]; # Month dimension unlimited
+
+
Move this out of the section on fixed-length arrays and into the
section on multidimensional arrays; it fits most
Some (many?) enumerations represent cycles, where incrementing from
the last element takes you back to the first: the seasons, the months,
the days of the week, the hues, etc. How hard would it be to write a
module that lets you say something like:
enum weekdays is cycle Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu
OK: before I submit a patch, let me make sure that I've got the
concepts straight:
@x[0] always means the first element of the array; @x[-1] always
means the last element of the array; @x[*+0] always means the
first element after the end of the array; @x[*-1] always means the
first element
Larry Wall wrote:
I like it. I'm a bit strapped for time at the moment, but if you send
me a patch for S09 I can probably dig up a program to apply it with. :)
Could someone advise me on how to create patches?
--
Jonathan Dataweaver Lang
Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:13:16PM +1030, Tom Lanyon wrote:
: Sounds like the following will work, but it doesn't seem 'nice'.
:
: for @invoice
: {
: .process;
: 1;
: } or fail 'No invoices to process';
Still think if there's no invoices it logically should be tested first.
herbert breunung wrote:
Von: Thomas Wittek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's, well, elegant! Yes.
Because and but it's tricky.
Nothing where I'd say wow, thats an easy solution to my problem!.
It's a bit complicated, because you have to understand and combine
several concepts. That's elegant. But
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Seconded. I would favor allowing an else block to be attached
following any loop block, with the semantics being that the else block
only gets triggered if the loop block doesn't run at least once. I'd
do this instead of a block trait (such as FIRST or LAST) because
Daniel Brockman wrote:
What about this?
given @foo {
for $_ - $x { ... }
when .empty { ... }
}
You can reverse the order if you want:
given @foo {
when .empty { ... }
for $_ - $x { ... }
}
Actually, you'd be better off using the second order; the when
Rick Delaney wrote:
Smylers wrote:
for @invoice
{
.process;
} or fail 'No invoices to process';
If that actually works then I'm happy.
It's dependent on .process not returning a false on the final iteration.
--
Jonathan Dataweaver Lang
The text of S02, S03, and S04 still contain references to the
now-defunct statement_modifier grammatical category.
Also, what's the reasoning behind specifically disallowing _all_
statement modifiers to do blocks (as opposed to forbidding just
looping statement modifiers)? Is this legacy from
AFAICT, there's nothing in the documentation to explain how one would
define a statement or operator with syntax along the lines of if ...
else ... or ... ?? ... :: ... Admittedly, the only cases I know of
where this is still an issue are the two listed above: for statements,
all other perl 5
Larry Wall wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: : Finally: when used as a statement modifier, is given considered to
: : be conditional or looping? (Gut instinct: conditional.)
:
: Why does it have to be one or the other? It's just a topicalizer.
:
: One implication of replacing
David Green wrote:
On 2/24/07, Jonathan Lang wrote:
In effect, using * as an array of indices gives us the ordinals
notation that has been requested on occasion: '*[0]' means 'first
element', '*[1]' means 'second element', '*[-1]' means 'last
element',
'*[0..2]' means 'first three elements
Smylers wrote:
Richard Hainsworth writes:
When does the specification of perl6 come to an end?
At a guess: when it's implemented.
Many of the recent changes have been made by Larry in response to his
trying to write the grammar, and encountering problems.
With all due respect:
Once the
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Larry Wall wrote:
: If you want the last index, say '*[-1]' instead of '* - 1'.
: If you want the first index, say '*[0]' instead of '* + 0'.
So the generic version of leaving off both ends would be *[1]..*[-2]
(ignoring that we'd probably write *[0]^..^*[-1
From S09:
When you use * with + and -, it creates a value of Whatever but Num,
which the array subscript interpreter will interpret as the subscript
one off the end of that dimension of the array.
Alternately, *+0 is the first element, and the subscript dwims from
the front or back depending on
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:49:34AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: That said, I think I can do one better:
:
: Ditch all of the above. Instead, '*' always acts like a list of all
: valid indices when used in the context of postcircumfix:[ ].
Ooh, shiny! Or at least, shiny
Luke Palmer wrote:
% as the mod operator is a good example of what you describe.
There's no need for mod to be a symbolic operator: when you read 5 % 3
you say 5 mod 3. Why would we not write 5 mod 3: it is just as
obvious what and how we are doing this operation. And % is uncommon
enough that
Thomas Wittek wrote:
Larry Wall schrieb:
I think the ¥ and Y operators are going to have to change to something else.
Very probably I missed something as I'm only a distant observer of the
Perl6 development: Why not just call it zip?!
There is a function called zip, wouldn't it be possible to
Damian Conway wrote:
I'd be more inclined to go
the other way and say that you can transform any list infix form to
the corresponding function form:
@a ZZ @b ZZ @c - zip operator
ZZ(@a; @b; @c) - zip function
@a XX @b XX @c - cross operator
XX(@a; @b; @c) - cross
Larry Wall wrote:
TSa wrote:
: Luke Palmer wrote:
: When do we do integer/rational math and when do we do floating point math?
:
: Since we have now flooring semantics on modulus and division I wonder
: how the coercion of nums to ints takes place. Does it also use floor?
: E.g. is @array[-0.3]
1 - 100 of 329 matches
Mail list logo
