"TC" == Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It might be worthwhile enough to kill
sub fn { return (7,8,9,10) }
$x = fn(); # $x == 10
TC But this happens many places. What about @foo[4,1,9,-2]?
TC It's just a listish thing. One should learn.
I don't want that to change. I
"SWM" == Steven W McDougall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not unless it is so declared my $a :shared.
SWM Sure it is.
SWM Here are some more examples.
SWM Example 1: Passing a reference to a block-scoped lexical into a thread.
Depends on how locking/threading is designed. There is a fundemental
Perl supplies an operator for line input - angle brackets. This is no
analogous operator for output. I propose "inverse angle brackets":
How about quotes? A quoted lhs expression could mean print. A quoted lhs
expression preceded by a file handle could mean print to filehandle.
Tom
Damian Conway wrote:
* invoke some other hierarchy of automagic methods
(REFIT? RESHAPE? MORPH? TRANSMOGRIFY?), or
REINCARNATE
"Perl6" == Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perl6 This RFC proposes that the second argument to Cbless be made
Perl6 mandatory, and that its semantics be enhanced slightly to cover a
Perl6 common, ugly, and frequently buggy usage.
Yes!
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge
"Perl6" == Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perl6 This RFC proposes a new pseudoclass named CNEXT.
Perl6 This pseudoclass would provide a way of correctly redispatching a method
Perl6 or an autoloaded method.
Yes!
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1
On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 12:16:48AM -0400, John Tobey wrote:
I agree with Michael that SETUP should be BLESS. You argue that it
Oops, I mean Nate. Sorry, Michael!
-John
Michael G Schwern wrote:
Derived classes will never have to override a base's implementation,
and all member variables should be private, and everyone will always
use an accessor, and the UN will bring about world peace, and as long
as I'm wishing for a perfect world, I'd like a pony. ;)
On 9/2/00 11:34 AM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
It doesn't seem that it's that hard to add a single line to your SETUP or
BLESS or whatever method that calls SUPER::SETUP.
I'm pretty sure one of the big points about the system described is that it
ensures both that there's always a predictable and
The whole notion of blessing is non-obvious enough already.
It's the benedictory (con)not(at)ion of blessing, not the bless()ing
itself that so confuses people, I think.
It bless() were instead named something like
mark
stamp
label
brand
retype
denote
notate
On 9/2/00 12:12 PM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
I think this RFC could work for this, but as I noted in a private email
to Damian I'd rather see a whole new keyword made, maybe "setup"?
sub new { setup {}, @_ }
sub SETUP { ... }
Sure, but does setup() bless? That's the question... :) In other
private $self-{data} = $derdata;
should be $derdatum here?
Yes. Thanks.
Damian
I'm still not totally convinced that its so horrid to make the
File::LockAndKey DESTROY call $self-SUPER::DESTROY manually...
Believe me, it is in a large, deep, and/or MI hierarchy!
but it does break encapsulation.
Exactly.
If you can figure a way out of the dilema I
The "multiple inheritance paths" one is good. I like that part a lot.
But the rest makes me really nervous if there's no way to override or
change it.
There is. I'll try and get the Cuse delegation RFC out today.
One thing nobody's brought up is this: What if you decide you
On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 03:18:06PM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
In certain cases, like the one in which you
proposed, you'd want to explicitly bypass the parent DESTROY.
sub DESTROY {
my $self = shift;
$self-UNIVERSAL::DESTROY(@_);
}
would skip the automatic chaining because the
Also, its not entirely clear why method chaining is desired only for
constructor and destructors. What about every other method?
Constructors and destructors are special. They're not about *doing*
something; they're about *being* (or not being) something.
A "doing" method *may* wish to
Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"TC" == Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
many systems allow for a global/local startup file for various
reasons. i see a potential use of this in perl but i don't see the
specific use yet. build it they will use it.
TC But Perl
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 11:40:13PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
"TC" == Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TC But Perl is not an interactive shell! Can you imagine if a C
TC compiler allowed arbitrary amounts of text to be pre-included
and what about the proposals for an
Tom Hughes wrote:
For example, in Perl you have for a long time been able to do this:
($one, $two) = grep /$pat/, @data;
However, what currently happens is grep goes to completion, then
discards possibly huge amounts of data just to return the first two
matches. For example, if
"Tom" == Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Wherever you think you need one of these, try to think again. Either
Tom it's already in list context, in which case it's silly to put in
Tom the list thing, or else there's always a better way to accomplish
Tom whatever you're trying to
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
it can be used for system specific @INC paths without
recompiling perl
That's what PERL5LIB is for.
PERL5LIB is available for the individual user to use, set, unset, change,
etc., at will. As sysadmin, you can't set it in /etc/profile and be
It's called meta shell
ftp://www.guug.de/pub/members/truemper/metash
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -nl
BEGIN{($,,$0)=("\040",21);@F=(sub{tr[a-zA-Z][n-za-mN-ZA-M];print;});
$_="Gnxr 1-3 ng n gvzr, gur ynfg bar vf cbvfba.";{$F[0]};sub t{*t=sub{};
return if rand().5;$_="Vg'f abg lbhe ghea lrg, abj
Here is my suggestion: What if other functions were able to backtrace
context and determine how many arguments to return just like split can?
I have an RFC on that:
RFC 21: Replace Cwantarray with a generic Cwant function
Cwant takes a list of strings that describe
Here is my suggestion: What if other functions were able to backtrace
context and determine how many arguments to return just like split can?
I have an RFC on that:
RFC 21: Replace Cwantarray with a generic Cwant function
Cwant takes a list of strings that describe
24 matches
Mail list logo
