On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Sam Vilain wrote:
Why on earth would you want to encourage such a short sighted
programming practise? The earth wobbles like a spinning top. In fact
It's hardly short sighted to want leap seconds to be abandoned (not in
Perl but world wide). The few people who
Luke Palmer wrote:
On 8/16/05, Ingo Blechschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
1_234; # surely 1234
1e23; # surely 1 * 10**23
1._5; # call of method _5 on 1?
1._foo; # call of method _foo on 1?
1.e5; # 1.0 * 10**5?
1.efoo; # call of method
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:14:43 +0300, Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Let's define some terms:
These are all very good and I'm going to incorprate them in the API docs.
scope/origin - where objects are created
I would refine this one.
origin scope - The lexical scope
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 03:58:54PM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
On 8/16/05, Tim Bunce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was a little dissapointed that there wasn't greater focus on using
Perl6 features - especially as it would have helped kick-start my own
understanding of Perl6 topics that I
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 01:16:19PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
At 4:04 PM +0100 8/16/05, Tim Bunce wrote:
I was a little dissapointed that there wasn't greater focus on using
Perl6 features - especially as it would have helped kick-start my own
understanding of Perl6 topics that I expect to be
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 00:59:52 +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
Sorry - I don't understand. If I do:
call_to_external_c_library_foo( $foo );
call_to_external_c_library_bar( $bar );
Then how does the compiler know that $foo is only used temporarily and can
be moved around, while
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 19:46:29 +0300, Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:32:50 -, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) =
wrote:
This is getting me thinking though:
=20
$*RUNTIME.Memory.GarbageCollector.dispose($object); # force it,
# even if it
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 12:12:02PM -0700, Dean Arnold wrote:
Tim Bunce wrote:
And nobody mentioned JDBC as a potential model. Odd that.
I was sorely tempted to do so (and did mention it a few times in
my posts, along w/ ODBC and ADO.NET), but there are some things about
JDBC which rub me
: If not a special form, should this work?
:
: my $pi is constant;
: $pi = 3;
That could be made to work by defining constant to mean you can assign
to it if it's undefined. But then it gets a little harder to reason
about it if $pi can later become undefined. I suppose we could
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 05:06:55 -, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
wrote:
This should be changed, timelyness will not prevent deadlock. However
it will prevent resource starvation aka livelock.
What I meant is deadlock due to resource starvation:
my $semaphore =
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 16:59:12 -0400, Mark Reed wrote:
On 2005-08-16 16:45, Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd find it hard defending a language that treated 1.e5 as a method call.
Guess we shouldn't sign you up for the Ruby Defense League, then?
irb(main):001:0 1.e5
On 8/17/05 5:39 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 03:58:54PM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
I think it'll take years, and much actual production experience building
Perl 6 modules before the community learns what works and what doesn't for a
Perl 6 API (let alone implementation). So
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 01:56:35PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
:
: : If not a special form, should this work?
: :
: : my $pi is constant;
: : $pi = 3;
:
: That could be made to work by defining constant to mean you can assign
: to it if it's undefined. But then it gets a little harder
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: That could be made to work by defining constant to mean you can assign
: to it if it's undefined. But then it gets a little harder to reason
: about it if $pi can later become undefined. I suppose we could
: disallow undefine($pi)
Hello all,
I tried to search for this answer in AES12, but I did not see anything,
and a perl6.lang search just brought up the whole $_.method vs.
./method debate (which was too much to shlog through).
So, onto my question, I am wondering what are the valid scopes for
$?SELF and $?CLASS.
Hi,
Stevan Little wrote:
So, onto my question, I am wondering what are the valid scopes for
$?SELF and $?CLASS.
Are these (magical) globals who only have bound values in certain
contexts? If that is so, what value do they have outside of a valid
context? undef? or is attempting to
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:25:40PM -0400, Roger Hale wrote:
: 1.e5# all of these...
: 1._e5 #
: 1._0e5 #
: 1.e_0_5_# == 1 * 10^5?
The last three are illegal because underline is allowed only between
digits.
: The longest-possible-token metarule, common
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 11:37:26AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:25:40PM -0400, Roger Hale wrote:
: 1.e5# all of these...
: 1._e5 #
: 1._0e5 #
: 1.e_0_5_# == 1 * 10^5?
The last three are illegal because underline is allowed only
On Aug 17, 2005, at 2:28 PM, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
Hi,
Stevan Little wrote:
So, onto my question, I am wondering what are the valid scopes for
$?SELF and $?CLASS.
Are these (magical) globals who only have bound values in certain
contexts? If that is so, what value do they have outside of
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 02:15:56PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: So, onto my question, I am wondering what are the valid scopes for
: $?SELF and $?CLASS.
:
: Are these (magical) globals who only have bound values in certain
: contexts? If that is so, what value do they have outside of a valid
class T
{
has $.a =1;
my $.a=2;
};
my T $o .= new;
$o.a().say;
What the result will be please?
1 or 2?
Or an error?
Thanks,
Xinming
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 03:33:35AM +0800, Yiyi Hu wrote:
: class T
: {
: has $.a =1;
: my $.a=2;
: };
: my T $o .= new;
: $o.a().say;
:
: What the result will be please?
: 1 or 2?
: Or an error?
Definitely a compile-time error. You can't declare the same lexical
name even if the declarator is
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 02:42:57PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: I think in a Role, $?SELF would still be the invocant in a method, and
: $?CLASS would (eventually) bind to the class the role was composed
: into.
Yes, such things stay generic as long as they need to, and no longer.
: As for
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 02:40:12AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 11:37:26AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 05:25:40PM -0400, Roger Hale wrote:
: : 1.e5# all of these...
: : 1._e5 #
: : 1._0e5 #
: : 1.e_0_5_# ==
One of the things I'm looking forward to in Perl6 is greatly improved
sub/method signatures.
I'm hoping that this will eliminate the need for anything like
Params::Validate, which IMO is a nasty hack to make up for a serious
weakness in Perl5.
I'm going to go over the various features in
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 12:02:53AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 08:47:18AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: : That could be made to work by defining constant to mean you can assign
: : to it if it's undefined. But then it gets a little harder to reason
: : about it if $pi
On 8/17/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You could still reason about it if you can determine what the initial
value is going to be. But certainly that's not a guarantee, which
is one of the reasons we're now calling this write/bind-once behavior
readonly and moving true constants to a
DR == Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DR Mandatory vs. Optional Parameters
DR This is a pretty straightforward one in P6, I think. Parameters can
DR be marked as required with is required like this:
DR sub date ($year, ?$month, ?$day) # positional
DR sub date (+$year is
On 8/17/05, Dave Rolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to go over the various features in P::V and see if there are
equivalents in Perl6, and bring up any questions I have. I think this
will be interesting for folks still new to P6 (like myself) and existing
P::V users (I think there's a
Two years ago or so, I became very happy to learn that the left side
of binding works just like a routine signature. So what if binding
*were* just a routine signature. That is, could we make this:
sub foo () {
say hello;
my $x := bar();
say goodbye $x;
}
Larry,
On Aug 17, 2005, at 2:53 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
: As for submethods, I see them like this:
:
: submethod foo () { ... }
:
: is really ..
:
: submethod foo () {
: next METHOD unless $?SELF ~~ $?CLASS;
: }
:
: At least that is how larry explained to me about a month ago.
Can't use ~~
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 22:06:07 +, Luke Palmer wrote:
{ credit_card_number =
{ optional = 1,
depends = [ 'credit_card_expiration', 'credit_card_holder_name' ] },
credit_card_expiration = { optional = 1 },
credit_card_holder_name = { optional = 1 },
In the last year AJAX has become a significant technology.
Now with perl 6 compiling to javascript and perl 5 and what not, i
think there is a big future when you merge the two and remove the
details.
The way HTML::Prototype works is:
you get an OO interface, which is clean and simple
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 06:26:02PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: I am not sure if changing classes makes sense here so much as just
: providing a means for submethod calls to be forced. Currently the
: metamodels do this by allowing a special parameter in the first
: argument which is a flag to
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 09:37:08PM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
: On 8/17/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: You could still reason about it if you can determine what the initial
: value is going to be. But certainly that's not a guarantee, which
: is one of the reasons we're now calling
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Luke Palmer wrote:
Dependencies, Exclusions, and Require one-of
With P::V I can do this:
{ credit_card_number =
{ optional = 1,
depends = [ 'credit_card_expiration', 'credit_card_holder_name' ] },
credit_card_expiration = { optional = 1 },
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Yuval Kogman wrote:
You sortof can:
sub validate (+$credit_card_number,
+$credit_card_expiration,
+$credit_card_holder_name)
where { defined $credit_card_number xor
defined $credit_card_expiration
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Dave Rolsky wrote:
Type Validation, isa, can
Params::Validate allows for several ways to check the _value_ of a parameter.
One way is to specify a primitive type like SCALAR or ARRAYREF. In P6 we
have that with this:
sub date (Scalar +$year is required, ...)
I'm not
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 11:45:52PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
And another question. How will I make Perl6 not do automatic coercion for
me. If I have this sub:
sub date (Int +$year is required, +$month, +$day)
BTW, Pugs supports the ++ syntax, which iirc is said to be back in favour
On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 01:28 -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
Why on earth would you want to encourage such a short sighted
programming practise? The earth wobbles like a spinning top. In fact
It's hardly short sighted to want leap seconds to be abandoned (not in
Perl but world wide). The few
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 01:04:56PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 11:45:52PM -0500, Dave Rolsky wrote:
: And another question. How will I make Perl6 not do automatic coercion for
: me. If I have this sub:
:
: sub date (Int +$year is required, +$month, +$day)
:
:
41 matches
Mail list logo
