On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 09:21:40AM -0700, Dave Whipp wrote:
Luke Palmer wrote:
Joked? Every other language that has pattern matching signatures that
I know of (that is, ML family and Prolog) uses _. Why should we break
that? IMO, it's immediately obvious what it means.
Something tells
Luke Palmer wrote:
Joked? Every other language that has pattern matching signatures that
I know of (that is, ML family and Prolog) uses _. Why should we break
that? IMO, it's immediately obvious what it means.
Something tells me that in signature unification, undef means this
has to be
I'm not sure we've reached consensus here, so I will try to summarize
what everyone said so far in order to clear my own head a bit. :)
Sorry in advance if i horribly misrepresent anyone's opinions.
Luke: Thinks the _ syntax is no joke, since every language with
pattern matching abilities has it.
HaloO Carl,
you wrote:
TSa: Prefers to rely on lazy evaluation, and says both tounge-in-cheek
and philosophically that if I don't want to care about some elements,
I should do so, and let Perl6 optimize. Proposes several ways of not
giving a name to a variable.
This hits home. And I did at no
hcchien raised the following question on #perl6[1]:
If I want to loop through a nine-element array three elements at a time, I do
my @a = 1..9;
for @a - $x, $y, $z { say $x }
But what if I don't care about the elements 1,4,7? Would the following
be a sane syntax?
my @a = 1..9;
for @a - undef,
On 9/22/05, Carl Mäsak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, to me it looks fairly intuitive. undef here means don't alias
the element, just throw it away... gaal joked about using _ instead
of undef. :)
Joked? Every other language that has pattern matching signatures that
I know of (that is, ML
On Sep 22, 2005, at 3:08 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
On 9/22/05, Carl Mäsak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, to me it looks fairly intuitive. undef here means don't alias
the element, just throw it away... gaal joked about using _ instead
of undef. :)
Joked? Every other language that has
HaloO,
Carl Mäsak wrote:
But what if I don't care about the elements 1,4,7? Would the following
be a sane syntax?
my @a = 1..9;
for @a - undef, $x, $y { say $x }
I think that, if the concept of lazy list evaluation is running
deep in Perl 6 than the obvious solution to me is:
for @a - $x,
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 07:23:06 -0400, David Storrs wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005, at 3:08 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
On 9/22/05, Carl Mäsak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, to me it looks fairly intuitive. undef here means don't alias
the element, just throw it away... gaal joked about using _
