On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 09:46, Matt wrote: > On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:32:12 -0400, Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > 3. Labels applies to blocks, not statements [...] > I've missed out on some Perl6 stuff, so excuse me as this was probably > already discussed. > > Does that mean this is possible?
Keep in mind that you are replying to a description of Fortress, a sort of "next generation FORTRAN" language specification from Sun, as it could apply to Perl 6. The example was "perlish" (but note the lack of ";"s) So, what you're asking is "if we did this kind of thing in Perl 6, would this then be possible?" Just clarifying. PS: I read over the Fortress document last night after a friend who I introduced to LtU had looked at it, and left it on my chair (I have such good friends). It's a great read, and I recommend it. There are many things in there that Perl 6 could snarf, but most of the really good bits would probably be better just implemented as a grammar module. I like the way you can lay out a matrix, and the auto-parallelization stuff is kind of cool. By default a generator that you loop over with for is parallelized, so: for x â g do action x end would perform the action for all values of x in an arbitrary and potentially simultaneous order (threading where available). You can, of course, request that such things happen sequentially if you want. Then you get into the multi-generator loops: for x â g1, y â g2, z â g3 do action x, y, z end This would execute all permutations of x, y and z in parallel (or as close to parallel as the execution environment allowed for). Kind of neat. -- Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith "It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback