On 5/15/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Kinyon wrote:
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be very feasible to do this natively in
P5. But, would it be possible to do it natively in P6? As in,
supported within the interpreter vs. through some sort of overloading.
Look at is atomic
I've been working on DBM::Deep, a way to have P5's data structures
stored on disk instead of RAM. One of the major features I've been
adding has been ACID transactions.
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be very feasible to do this natively in
P5. But, would it be possible to do it natively in P6? As
On 2/14/06, Stevan Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that the metaclass (stored in the pseudo-lexical $::CLASS)
should create a number of anonymous roles on the fly:
role {
multi method a (::CLASS $self) { ... }
multi method a (::CLASS $self, Scalar $value) { ... }
On 1/26/06, Stevan Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually this might not be a bad approach in this case. Take this for
instance:
method foo (Foo $self, $key) {
((Hash) $self){$key}
}
The syntax is ugly, but it makes what you are doing more explicit. I
would also think that in most
On 1/26/06, Stevan Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there is need to treat something as a Hash, then provide it with a
postcircumfix{} and leave it at that. It's highly unlikely that you
will want to add Hash-like behavior to something that already has a
postcircumfix{} because it
On 1/25/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud skribis 2006-01-25 13:47 (-0600):
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 11:37:42AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
I've changed the flipflop operator/macro to ff, short for flipflop.
This has several benefits. ...
...another of which is that we
On 1/20/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note, by the way, that JS has primitive strings, and Strings, only the
latter being objects. Fortunately for us, though, a string is
automatically promoted to a String when the string is USED AS an object.
In other words, according to userland,
On 1/19/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 19 January 2006 19:50, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Nothing. Just like it's not a problem if Perl6 uses one of the
Ruby-specific PMCs for storage. In fact, the alternate $repr idea is
specifically to allow for the use of foreign datatypes
On 1/20/06, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip really cool blathering]
I don't have much to say on the deeper question, but I have a few
ideas on the P5 - P6 translation question, especially as it relates
to OO:
1) Don't translate at all. Ponie, delegating to Parrot, is
supposed to
On 1/20/06, Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 04:20:54PM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Pros: Larry doesn't have to do anything more on the WMoT.
Cons: The community, for some reason, really wants this
auto-translator, even though there wasn't one for P4-P5
On 1/19/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-18 20:57 (-0500):
Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
Nonsense. OO isn't a set of features, and OO isn't syntax.
Granted, syntax can really help to understand OO, and a set of features
is nice, because
On 1/18/06, Audrey Tang (autrijus) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://cakoose.com/wiki/type_system_terminology#13
Any practical programming language with structural subtyping will
probably let you create and use aliases for type names (so you don't
have to write the full form everywhere). However,
To further extend Steve's argument (which I wholeheartedly agree
with), I wanted to point out one thing: bless has nothing to do with
OO programming as conceived of in Perl6. It does one thing and only
one thing:
- tag a reference with a package name.
This is used in a few places:
- to
On 1/19/06, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 16:10 (-0500):
There are no references in Perl6.
I have to admit, though, that I've never seen this statement, or
anything implying it. It's entirely new to me.
Is your Perl the same as that of other people
On 1/19/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 20:02, Rob Kinyon wrote:
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Answer me this then -- under your scheme, can I subclass a Perl 5 class
with Perl 6 code, instantiate the subclass, and use that object
Today on #perl6, Audrey, Stevan and I were talking about $repr. A
tangent arose where Audrey said that the difference between class
methods and instance methods was simply whether or not the body
contained an attribute access.
Is this true? If it is, then I think it violates polymorphism as
On 1/18/06, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:56:53PM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Today on #perl6, Audrey, Stevan and I were talking about $repr. A
: tangent arose where Audrey said that the difference between class
: methods and instance methods was simply whether
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 14:13, Stevan Little wrote:
Do we really still need to retain the old Perl 5 version of bless?
What purpose does it serve that p6opaque does not do in a better/
faster/cleaner way?
Interoperability with Perl 5
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 17:57, Rob Kinyon wrote:
Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
I'll play your semantic game if you play my what-if game.
I have a fair bit of Perl 5 code. Ponie works. I want to migrate my Perl 5
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:11, Rob Kinyon wrote:
As for how that will be handled, I would think that it would be as follows:
- in Perl6, objects created in another language will be treated as
p6opaque (unless some other unbox
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) by default, your object is opaque
2) if you don't want this, you can always use bless()
For interoperability with Perl 5 classes, I don't want to use an opaque
object. Ergo, I want to use bless() (or something, but does that explain why
I
On 1/18/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:39, Rob Kinyon wrote:
No, you want to specify the $repr in CREATE(). But, p6hash will still
not be the same as a ref to an HV. Frankly, I think you're better off
letting Parrot mediate things the same way
On 1/18/06, Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excuse my ignorance of the finer points, but I thought the reason for
bless's continued existence was so that the same sort of brilliant OO
experimentation that Damian and others have done with pure Perl 5 can
continue to be done in pure Perl 6
On 1/17/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But putter on #perl6 reports 1 on his amd64. I'd be happy we spec it
has to have to return 1 always for boxed Num types, even though it means
additional cycles for boxed numeric types.
Isn't the point of boxing to provide a hardware-independent
On 1/16/06, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, at least for any block that really is capturing a closure.
Perhaps we need to distinguish those from accidentally nested
top-level functions. But undecorated sub is more-or-less defined
to be our sub anyway, just as with package, module,
I wouldn't see a problem with defining a Real role that has a fairly
sparse set of operations. Afterall, a type that does support ++ and --
(e.g. Int, Num) could easily does Enumerable if it wants to declare
that it supports them.
What about the scripty-doo side of Perl6? One of the
On 1/12/06, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The next/prev semantics are, and should be more general than ±1, I
just think that ±1 should remain the default for reals ints.
So, Num (and all types that derive from Num) should have a next of {
@_[0] + 1 } and a prev of { @_[0] -
On 1/2/06, TSa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
The point was that you should know when you're passing a named
argument, always. Objects that behave specially when passed to a
function prevent the ability to abstract uniformly using functions.[1]
...
[1] This is one
On 12/30/05, Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stuart Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 29/12/05, Austin Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, is there a conceptual connection between imposing named argument
interpretation on pairs in an arg list and slurping up the end of a
parameter
On 12/27/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:10:45AM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Creating an array whose positions are aliases for positions in another
: array can be useful. How about
:
: my @s := @a[0,2,4] is alias;
:
: @a[2] = 3; # @s[1] == 3
On 12/22/05, Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 04:47:21PM +0100, Michele Dondi wrote:
Also I wonder if one will be able to push(), pop(), etc. array slices as
well whole arrays. A' la
my @a=qw/aa bb cc dd ee/;
my $s=pop @a[0..2]; # or [0,2] or just
On 12/17/05, Darren Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
2. Until a value is put in a container, the container has the
POTENTIAL to store any value from its domain, so with respect to that
container, there are as many undefs as there are values in its
domain; with some container types, this
On 12/16/05, Ovid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Rob Kinyon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for the syntactic sugar, I'm not quite sure what should be
done here. And, with macros, it's not clear that there needs
to be an authoritative answer. Personally, I'd simply overload
+ for union
On 12/16/05, Ovid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Minor nit: we're discussing to the relational algebra and not the
relational Calculus (unless the topic changed and I wasn't paying
attention. I wouldn't be surprised :)
Algebra, in general, is a specific form of calculus. So, we're
speaking of the
On 12/16/05, Darren Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something else I've been thinking about, as a tangent to the
relational data models discussion, concerns Perl's concept of
undef, which I see as being fully equivalent to the relational
model's concept of null.
The relational model doesn't
[snip entire conversation so far]
(Please bear with me - I'm going to go in random directions.)
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that there's only
a few things missing in P6:
1) An elegant way of creating a tuple-type (the table, so to speak)
2) A way of providing
As for the original question, I think that the Perl 6 grammar will
be a much better example for how to parse other languages than a
Perl 5 grammar would be, since one of the underlying design currents
from the beginning has been that Perl 6 had to be a language that
was amenable to parsing by
I just read the slides about CAPerl (http://caperl.links.org/) and it's an
interesting idea. Leaving aside the question of whether this would work in
Perl5 or not, I think it would be very interesting to look at building this
concept into Perl6. Here's how I'd envision doing so:
* Any
On 11/23/05, Flavio S. Glock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we have:
say 1..Inf;
to output an infinite stream, instead of just looping forever?
OTOH, it would be nice if
say substr( ~(1..Inf), 0, 10 )
printed 1 2 3 4 5.
Flattened lists would still loop forever (or fail):
say
On 11/23/05, Flavio S. Glock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about allowing reduce() to return a scalar with the same laziness
as the list:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - a lazy string if @list is lazy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - a lazy number if @list is lazy
It would look like:
$foo = substr(
On 11/23/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: I'm also puzzled that you feel the need to write 0..$n-1 so often; there
: are so many alternatives to fenceposting in P5 that I almost never write
: an expression like that, so why is it cropping up that much in P6?
Couple reasons occur to
On 11/22/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What tipped me over the edge, however, is that I want ^$x back for a
unary operator that is short for 0..^$x, that is, the range from 0
to $x - 1. I kept wanting such an operator in revising S09. It also
makes it easy to write
for ^5 {
On 11/21/05, TSa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
On 11/21/05, Ingo Blechschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, the compiler is free to optimize these things if it can prove
that runtime's statement_control:if is the same as the internal
optimized
On 11/20/05, Daniel Brockman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reversing an array, changing it, and then rereversing it ---
I think that kind of pattern is common.
I would think that reversing a string, modifying it, then reversing it
back is more common. Does modifying the reversal of a string modify
On 11/20/05, Ingo Blechschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Yep. Also note that for is not a special magical construct in Perl 6,
it's a simple subroutine (statement_control:for, with the signature
([EMAIL PROTECTED], Code *code)). (Of course, it'll usually be optimized.)
Example:
{
On 11/11/05, Joe Gottman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The various synopses contain many mentions of Iterators. These are used,
for instance, to implement lazy lists so the expression 1..1_000_000 does
not have to allocate a million element array. But as far as I can tell the
term is never
On 10/13/05, Dave Whipp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(ref: http://svn.openfoundry.org/pugs/docs/notes/theory.pod)
theory Ring{::R} {
multi infix:+ (R, R -- R) {...}
multi prefix:- (R -- R){...}
multi infix:- (R $x, R $y -- R) { $x + (-$y) }
snarky
But if we have a mandatory type inferencer underneath that is merely
ignored when it's inconvenient, then we could probably automatically
delay evaluation of the code. . . .
I'm not so certain that ignoring the mandatory type inferencer is a
good idea, even when it's inconvenient. I
On 11/8/05, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 13:15 -0500, Austin Frank wrote:
If roles are interfaces, do we want any class that provides an interface
consistent with a role to implicitly do the role? That is, if a class
fulfills all of the interface requirements
On 11/7/05, Michele Dondi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Rob Kinyon wrote:
So, for a bit of extra complexity, I get peace of mind for myself and my
users.
The point being, and I'm stressing it once again but no more than once,
that maybe we're adding two bits of extra
Okay, I won't shout (not even on PerlMonks :-), but named parameters
default to optional, so you'd have to write that as
sub convert (:$from!, :$to!, :$thing!) { ... }
in the current scheme of things.
Either way, the point is still that the benefits FAR outweigh any
additional
$ perl -le '$u=1; ($y=$u*=5)++; print $y'
6
It's interesting to note that this parse (due to precedence) as
($y=($u*=5))++, not (($y=$u)*=5)++
This is important for overloaded operators (which are going to become
much easier to do in Perl6). The importance arises if Perl6 allows
assignment to
On 11/4/05, Michele Dondi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm still convinced my remark _partly_ applies in the sense that the
overall impression is that a vast majority of most common needs is
addressed by a *subset* of the current features and trying to stuff all
them in has brought in quite a lot
On 11/4/05, Austin Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello!
If roles are interfaces, do we want any class that provides an interface
consistent with a role to implicitly do the role? That is, if a class
fulfills all of the interface requirements of a role without actually
saying it does the
And when your user does want to, essentially say Nah, you screwed up
designing
that object protocol, children shouldn't've been protected. it's the work of
a
moment to write:
thing.send(:children, *args)
I told you I'm still learning. I hadn't gotten to that part of the Pickaxe. :-/
On 11/3/05, Michele Dondi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/17556
I understand that Perl6 allows blocks with changed/enhanced syntax, so
it is or will become possible (to add it) as if it was in the
On Nov 2, 2005, at 9:02 PM, Jonathan Lang wrote:
Let's say you have this:
role A {method foo() { code1; } }
role B {method foo() { code2; } }
role C does A does B {
method foo() { A::foo(); }
method bar() { B::foo(); }
}
Should the following be valid?
1. choose one of a set of available methods to call its own.
2. create a version of its own.
3. pass the buck.
#1 and #2 are identical. Stevan and I have always viewed #1 as a
special case of #2. If you want to choose a method to call, then
create a method of your own and have it wrap the one
But IMHO the reduction in typing for this relatively minor issue is not
really worth the surprise to newbies at seeing operandless operators.
AMEN!
Rob
On 10/28/05, Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roles can hold instance data that will be composed into a class. What
I'm saying is that if you have two roles:
role X { has $:foo; }
role Y { has $:foo; }
And a class that's composed of them:
class Xy does X does Y { ... }
That
On 10/28/05, Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
It was the fact that at each stage of the game, we summarized the
defaults and requirements for each role, ignoring the internal makeup
(i.e., what roles were composed into it, etc.).
So, in theory, one should be able to ask any given
On 10/26/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:35:05PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
: On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 21:58 -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
:
: Plus, the argument is a straw man. Instead of:
:
: class Some::Class is also {
: }
:
: you would do
On 10/27/05, TSa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
: Yes, and dispatch as a runtime keyed access into a code multitude.
: The covariant part of the method's sig! The code equivalent to keyed
: data access into hashes.
Um, yeah. Won't play in Peoria, though.
Where
On 10/27/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 05:37:13AM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Will I be able to do something like:
:
: package Foo;
Hmm, you just started in Perl 5 mode.
: $*VERSION = 1.3.2;
Perl 5 would get confused here, so I'm presuming Perl 6
And in fact, its very existence defies another implicit principle of
mine, that is, the principle of partial definition: Defining a new
type or instance can only break a previously typechecking program by
making it ambiguous. The idea behind that is that at some time you
may realize that
That's just self.meta.add_method($label, $method) by my lights.
A .meta already implies/ignores the .class coercion. If we are to
support prototype-based programming $x.meta *must not care* whether
it has been given a class or an instance or something in between.
What I am calling a class
On 10/26/05, Stevan Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 26, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
Of course, there are other words that are somewhat synonymous with
class, Unfortunately sort is already hosed. Maybe kind.
Actually kind is used in the Core Calculus for Metaclasses paper
So maybe we can define our terms like this:
type: a completely generic metaterm for any of the following,
and then some.
class: a mutable interface object that manages instances in the
classical way, with covariant derivational properties.
role: an immutable and
: 3) Aren't classes mutable and roles immutable by default only? Or has
: this changed?
Of course. To change the default for a role, call it a class, and
to change the default for a class, call it a role. :-)
Does this mean that roles are the recommended way to create immutable
classes?
On 10/26/05, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 20:29 -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
I would prefer to use roles as they're closed by default, leaving
class to be my powertool, if I need the power.
I don't understand this desire; can you explain your reasoning?
If a role
On 10/26/05, Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Okay, an open class means you can add methods to it, right? So, let's
say you have this class:
class Foo {
method foo() {...}
method bar() {...}
}
And this code:
my Foo $x = Foo.new;
$x.foo();
On 10/25/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it'd be great if +=, ~=, +=, ++, etc, could all assume $_ on
their LHS when there is no obvious operand.
This clashes with prefix:=, but that's nothing a space cannot fix.
Same for lvalue subs called x or xx (or X or XX).
my $subject =
Basically, ¢T is a close analog of t, which is the variableish form
for sub t. When used in a declaration, both of them introduce a
bare name as an alias into whatever scope the declaration is inserting
symbols, albeit with different syntactic slots. So just as
my t := { ... }
On 10/25/05, Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/24/05, H.Merijn Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:49:51 -0400, Joshua Gatcomb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
FEAR: Perl6 internals will be just as inaccessable as p5
paradox. Many people don't find perl5 inaccessible
On 10/24/05, Nate Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joshua Gatcomb wrote:
On 10/24/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Feel free to add your own, or fears you heard about!
FEAR: The Perl6 process is driving away too many good developers
FEAR: Perl6 will not be as portable as p5
FEAR:
On 10/23/05, Autrijus Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Kogai wrote:
To make the matter worse, there are not just one yen sign in Unicode.
Take a look at this.
¥ U+00A5 YEN SIGN
￥ U+FFE5 FULLWIDTH YEN SIGN
Tough they look and groks the same to human, computers handle them
On 10/21/05, Steve Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 02:37:09PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
Steve Peters skribis 2005-10-21 6:07 (-0500):
Older versions of Eclipse are not able to enter these characters. That's
where the copy and paste comes in.
That's where upgrades
I'd like to propose a new metamodel that (I hope) will meet all the
specs @Larry has stated thus far. This metamodel is in two parts.
Part the first:
There is a single object given to P6 called Factory. (No, Steve, there
are no turtles.) Factory has two behaviors, no state, and no classes.
The
So, you are proposing that the Perl of the Unicode era be limited to
ASCII because a 15 year old editor cannot handle the charset? That's
like suggesting that operating systems should all be bootable from a
single floppy because not everyone has access to a CD drive.
I saying that, since
Feh - I really need to get on gmail's case for providing a keystroke
for Reply to All.
Rob
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nate Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Oct 21, 2005 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: $1 change issues [was Re: syntax for accessing multiple
versions of a module]
To: Rob
Does TYE's Algorithm::Loops's mapcar() provide the basic functionality
of what you're looking for?
Rob
On 10/21/05, Mark Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a CPAN module which provides the functionality of ¥/zip() for
Perl5? I don't see anything obvious in the Bundle::Perl6 stuff. Not
On 10/20/05, Nate Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Larry Wall wrote:
I think there can be some kind of community metainformation that sets
defaults appropriately. And if not, the site/project can certainly
establish defaults. On the other hand, a lot of projects do simply
want to specify
On 10/20/05, Nate Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, it shares alot with other languages people know and use.
That's more because languages are incestuous (like Perl) instead of
languages independently arriving at the same conclusions. Yes, the
while loop is going to look the same everywhere.
Unfortunately many people WILL have to deal with such changes, and
the question should be: Does a given change offer a clear improvement?
As you said, if we're helping %1 of people %1 of the time, are the
other 99% really going to change all their scripts? No chance.
You again misread what I
On 10/20/05, Steve Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have some serious concerns about using Latin-1 sigils within Perl 6 and
the ASCII multi-character aliases. Am I not understanding something that
I should see this as an advantage?
I had the same concern a few months back. I've come to see
Surely you aren't suggesting that these non-English speakers do not have
access to the ASCII (or EBCDIC) character sets for their editors, are you?
Surely you aren't suggesting that your editor doesn't have access to
the Latin-1 charset, are you? Let's take a look at popular editors:
vi - check
On 10/19/05, Darren Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
An example of when this situation can arise is if person X implements
a simplified XML DOM implementation using 2 classes, Document and
Node, that work together, where one of those classes (Document) can
create objects of the other
On 10/19/05, Nate Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My concern is that we're solving problems that don't really exist in
real-world Perl usage. Are there really two competing authors of DBI?
Or, for any product, do two people really try to market SuperWidget?
No, one person just changes to
Some other features:
1) You can write your program in any combination of programming styles
and languages, as you see fit. Thus, you can use your OO library
written in Ruby, that really fast C routine, and your Perl code, all
in one place.
2) There are a large number of operators that support
[snip]
Let me rephrase to see if I understand you - you like the fact that
boxed types + roles applied to those types + compile-time type
checking/inference allows you to tag a piece of information (int,
char, string, obj, whatever) with arbitrary metadata. Add that to the
fact that you can
On 10/18/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-10-18 22:41 (+0100):
my $foo = DBI(1.38)-new();
my $bar = DBI(1.40)-new();
I like this syntax, and have a somewhat relevant question: can a module
be aliased entirely, including all its subclasses/-roles/-.*?
On 10/18/05, Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SL == Stevan Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SL On Oct 18, 2005, at 1:45 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
On 10/18/05, Rob Kinyon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3) Macros. Nuff said.
Not quite. Lispish macros, that is, macros
== CONCLUSION / WRAP-UP
So, now that I have sufficiently bored you all to tears, I will do a
quick re-cap of the main question, and the possible solutions.
Should metaclasses be inherited along normal class lines?
Meaning that if Foo uses a custom metaclass, and Bar isa Foo, then
Bar also
In the discussions I've had with Steve, one thing that always
nagged me - what's the difference between a class and a role? I
couldn't fix it in my head why there were two separate concepts.
Steve, yesterday, mentioned to me that in the metamodel that he's got
so far, Class does Role. This
On 10/14/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: I need to stress that I'm not suggesting that the keyword role
: be removed. It won't be the first time we have keywords that mean the
: same thing, just with a little sugar added. It definitely improves
: maintainability to have separate
I think this is an opportune time for me to express that I think the
ability to close-source a module is important. I love open source,
and I couldn't imagine writing anything by myself that I wouldn't
share. But in order for Perl to be taken seriously as a commercial
client-side language,
On 10/12/05, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 21:50 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
This has even more implications with closed classes to which you
don't have source level access, and if this can happen it will
happen - i'm pretty sure that some commercial database
All -
I'm partly to blame for this thread because I put the idea into
Steve's head that class methods being inheritable may be dogma and not
a useful thing. Mea culpa.
That said, I want to put forward a possible reason why you would
want class methods to be inheritable - to provide pure
Piers Cawley said:
in other words, some way of declaring that a subroutine wants to hang onto
every lexical it can see in its lexical stack, not matter what static analysis
may say.
I'm not arguing with the idea, in general. I just want to point out
that this implies that you're going to hold
localtime() and gmtime() seem fairly core to me. The array contexts are
simple, and the scalar context is an RFC valid string. Nothing too heavy
there. The time() function is typically only moderately useful without
localtime().
This is true if the time() function returns a simple scalar
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
