Re: Tweaking junctions

2010-10-23 Thread Brandon S Allbery KF8NH
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/22/10 13:00 , Dave Whipp wrote: Damian Conway wrote: I've been thinking about junctions, and I believe we may need a small tweak to (at least) the jargon in one part of the specification. When this issue has been raised in the past, the

Re: Tweaking junctions

2010-10-23 Thread Damian Conway
Brandon mused: It occurs to me:  If their purpose is that narrow, why are they wasting conceptual space in the core language? Well, mainly because their purpose isn't narrow at all: it's parallelized data comparisons (all(@values) $threshold), and multiway comparisons (all(@values) ~~

Re: Tweaking junctions

2010-10-23 Thread yary
In general I like where this is going but need a little hand holding here- I'm not an expert on junctions or anything perl6- So I'm going to go on to propose that we create a fifth class of Junction: the transjunction, with corresponding keyword Cevery. It seems that by these definitions every

Re: Tweaking junctions

2010-10-23 Thread Damian Conway
In general I like where this is going but need a little hand holding here- I'm not an expert on junctions or anything perl6- So I'm going to go on to propose that we create a fifth class of Junction: the transjunction, with corresponding keyword Cevery. It seems that by these definitions