HaloO
Larry Wall wrote:
But maybe you meant @x[*+2 .. *-1]? And @x[*] would be
@x[*+0..^*-0]
written out that way.
How far can we drive the dwimmy use of the three values
that determine array access, i.e first and last index and
length. E.g. would @x[*+0..*/2] roughly slice to the
HaloO,
I wrote:
E.g. would @x[*+0..*/2] roughly slice to the middle
of the array?
Hmm, this might not work. It should be @x[*+0..*-1-*/2]
on the footing that the last * is dwiming the length.
This implies that dispatches to infix:-:(Whatever,
Whatever) and infix/:(Whatever,Int) are supported
Could we get a single-character symbol that could be used in an array
index to refer to its shape in a dwimmy way? Something like:
@x[*.head]
@x[*.tail] # equivalent to @x[*]
@A[*.head+2, *.tail-1]
(where head and tail are methods of the shape that return the current
dimension's start and
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:54:26PM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Could we get a single-character symbol that could be used in an array
: index to refer to its shape in a dwimmy way? Something like:
:
: @x[*.head]
: @x[*.tail] # equivalent to @x[*]
: @A[*.head+2, *.tail-1]
:
: (where head and
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 03:47:34PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: This mornings up date proposed
Now the da rn spam fi1ters are chang.ng my spelling to look like sp*m.
Yeah, that's the 4icket... :)
Larry
At 12:11 PM -0800 1/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Log:
Disabled negative subscript dwimmery for all shaped arrays.
* can now take + and - operators.
At 2:54 PM -0800 1/30/07, Jonathan Lang wrote:
Could we get a single-character symbol that could be used in an array
index to refer to its
Larry Wall wrote:
And @x[*] would be
@x[*+0..^*-0]
written out that way. Or possibly
@x[-* ..^ +*]
depending on how we define the unaries.
Hmm... how about this:
Normally, * in the context of an indexer acts as a Range object,
covering the range of available indices (defined
