Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Default methods for objects
>
> =head1 ABSTRACT
>
> This RFC proposes syntactic support for default methods
> that can be defined for blessed references. This would
> allow the brackets C<()>, C<{}> and C<[]> to be used
> for a variety of convenien
subscribe by sending mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
more information at http://dev.perl.org/lists
LIST: perl6-language-data
CHAIR: Jeremy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MISSION:Discuss and draft RFCS for Perl 6 language features
related to the Perl Data Languag
Glenn Linderman wrote:
>
> Peter Scott wrote:
>
> > I have often wished that digraphs were not bundled with variables in this
> > respect, i.e., I wanted to put a string containing \n inside single quotes
> > just 'cuz it didn't contain variables to be interpolated. Whether there's
> > a way of
"David L. Nicol" wrote:
>
> What if its a method of anything in an array? $_ is already
> a reference to the object on the array in for loops rather
> than a copy of it. What if we make change be not something about
> for loops, but about anything in an array?
>
> print "The index, in
>>-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
>>-subs = ALL sub/method/func issues, like lvalue subs
>>-strict = ALL lexical/global variable scoping issues
>>-objects = ALL OO and module issues
>>-flow = ALL flow/threading issues
>>-errors = ALL er
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 09:19:20AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>
>I realize this is very pedestrian compared to the exception-handling stuff
>we've been tossing around, which could largely be said to render the issue
>moot; but I thought I'd shake the branches anyway and see what fell out.
>
>I'm
This discussion should be on the -datetime sublist. Please do not
discuss this RFC any further on the main language list.
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone:
> Mmm... yummy... And placeholder names seem to be getting a real
> role in life too! I wonder if hashes used as HOF arguments in
> general should use placeholder names to fill in their arguments
> from the corresponding hash elements. That would be even yummier!
Personally I think an
Damian Conway wrote:
> Suppose C were a built-in function with parameter list:
>
> sub with (\%; ^&) {...}
>
> That is, C takes an explicit hash and -- optionally -- a block, sub
ref,
> or higher order function.
> <...>
> If C is called with *both* a hash and a block/sub ref/h.o.f. as
> arguments,
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 10:48:25PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> > Lets use hats again then.
> >
> > %ws{
> > print ^$height; #prints $ws{height}
> > print $height; # perl5 visibility rules
> > };
>
> But no $ for the keys of %ws.
>
>
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> But no $ for the keys of %ws.
>
> %ws {
> print ^height; # prints $ws{height}
> print $height; # prints $height
> }
I'm thinking that ^name is short for $^name is short for ${^name}
and the longer version is what you
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 10:48:25PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> Lets use hats again then.
>
> %ws{
> print ^$height; #prints $ws{height}
> print $height; # perl5 visibility rules
> };
But no $ for the keys of %ws.
%ws {
print ^heigh
Damian Conway wrote:
> Actually, no I wouldn't.
> I'd be happier if it were more explicit.
>
> How about:
>
> keys %professors = ^a->name cmp ^b->name;
>
> keys %students = $$students{^1}{GPA} <=> $$students{^0}{GPA} };
>
> ;-)
>
> Damian
Okay, let's see what you've got here
> Lets use hats again then.
>
>%ws{
>print ^$height; #prints $ws{height}
>print $height; # perl5 visibility rules
>};
>
> AFAIK, the entirety of %name{something here} is unplowed ground, as
> far as perl syntax goes.
For good reason, A
Jeremy Howard wrote:
>
> This is one of those
> few cases where VB has nicer syntax--within a 'with' block you have to
> precede a property name with '.' to get the with block scope:
>
> dim height as double
> dim ws as new Excel.worksheet // 'worksheet' has a 'height' property
>
> with
David L. Nicol wrote:
> Yes, absolutely, about the semantics.
>
> About the syntax, how about just in a block behind %HASHNAME?
>
> (as long as it doesn't use $a and $b, of course )
> (or if the insta-sort thing needs "sort" written in and this doesn't)
>
> %record{
>
> $something_new = 3; # just
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 05:47:53PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> > I want
> > @result = @a || @b;
> > to be like:
> > (@result = @a) or (@result = @b);
> >
> > That's what all my students keep expecting it to mean.
>
> And that's what I keep wishing it mea
Yes, absolutely, about the semantics.
About the syntax, how about just in a block behind %HASHNAME?
(as long as it doesn't use $a and $b, of course )
(or if the insta-sort thing needs "sort" written in and this doesn't)
%record{
$something_new = 3; # just set $rec
What if its a method of anything in an array? $_ is already
a reference to the object on the array in for loops rather
than a copy of it. What if we make change be not something about
for loops, but about anything in an array?
print "The index, in its array, of <<$_>> is $CORE::ARRAY
> >>%professors{ $a->name cmp $b->name };
> >>
> >>%students{ $$students{$b}{GPA} <=> $$students{$a}{GPA} };
> >
> > These already mean something. Please don't "special-case" them.
>
> No they don't.
Apologies. You're quite correct.
> > Isn't this b
Damian Conway wrote:
>
>>%professors{ $a->name cmp $b->name };
>>
>>%students{ $$students{$b}{GPA} <=> $$students{$a}{GPA} };
>
> These already mean something. Please don't "special-case" them.
No they don't.
[david@nicol1 perl]$ perl -le '%nums = (1..20); print %nums{1}'
C
I'd like to say that I whole-heartedly endorse the sentiments expressed in
this RFC (and *not* just because it likes my book! ;-)
It will definitely underpin my thinking when I finally put together my
own OO RFCs.
Well done, John.
Damian
> > print sub {
> > return < > Dear $_[0]
> > Your tuition is now due. Please send in a payment of at least
> > $_[1].
> > SPAM
> > }
>
> What does the second one mean, then? Doesn't
>
> print sub { ... }
> This RFC proposes that the existing C<..> operator produce a lazily
> evaluated list. In addition, a new operation C<:> is proposed that allows
> for the generation of lazily evaluated lists based on any Perl expression.
Llama 2nd ed. calls ? the "lazy operator" w/in regexes, in my lazy props
Decklin Foster wrote:
>
> [replying from here since this is the only way I received it]
>
> > "Myers, Dirk" wrote:
> > >
> > > $line/pattern/ ;
> >
> > > /pattern/ ($line) ;
>
> I don't think these should be changed. Here's how I tend to pronouce
> things:
>
> $x = 'foo'; #
Nathan Wiger wrote:
>
> We're getting deluged with RFC's and emails. We should start thinking
> "will this RFC or idea *add value* to Perl 6?". If not, and it just
> makes something work differently, it _might_ not be worth an RFC.
I disagree completely. For one thing, there's no such thing as P
Damian Conway wrote:
> This:
>
> print < Dear ^name:
> Your tuition is now due. Please send in a payment of at least
> ^minumum.
> SPAM
>
> already means:
>
> print sub {
> return < Dear $_[0]
> Your tuition is now
> "RA" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RA> Damien Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Arrays are ordered. Hashes are not. Sure, you can iterate over a hash,
>> but add an element to one and you can change the order of everything in
>> it.
RA> Formally, I believe it's
[replying from here since this is the only way I received it]
> "Myers, Dirk" wrote:
> >
> > $line/pattern/ ;
>
> > /pattern/ ($line) ;
I don't think these should be changed. Here's how I tend to pronouce
things:
$x = 'foo'; # "x gets foo"
/bar/;# "match on bar"
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rather than indicating that lazy evaluation is required by the
> addition of incomprehensible syntactic hints, a "lazy array context"
> is indicated by the presence of the new keyword C.
I think I've actual
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A "sort function" will need to be added into the list of magics
> maintained for every associative array.
>
> A set of macros in terms of sort will need to be defined which
> replace keys, values, and each f
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, John Porter wrote:
> Huh? They need to be "globals", because the "with" mechanism
> is going to have to be able to write them into a symbol table.
> You can't do this with lexicals. (Well, maybe that'll be different
> in perl6?)
Well, if you're using the HOF nota
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 03:10:44PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> My proposal would be what I implemented for perl5 a while back (Sarathy
> didn't dislike it, but wasn't convinced enough to put it in): all
> dereferencing can be done with ->.
>
> $x->@ is the same as @$x
> $x->% is the same as %$x
>
Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "Jeremy Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
whispered:
> | No. They are lazily evaluated and require special optimisations to allow
>
> I don't completely understand this whole lazy evaluation, so I'm confused
> how these functions would wo
Karl Glazebrook wrote:
>
> Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
> >
> > Karl Glazebrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > o Why do I think perl has too much line noise? Because of code like this:
> > >
> > > @{$x->{$$fred{Blah}}}[1..3]
> >
> > This is indeed horrible. However, I fail to se
Ted Ashton wrote:
>
> > But the most direct way to measure how well the
> > language slides into people's heads is by seeing how hard it is for them
> > to get the hang of it.
>
> Nope. I've yet to be convinced that "fits in your head" is the same as
> "went in easily". Hang
> I certainly don't want m, tr, or s to go away
> (or /regex/ either.) But the =~ bothers me.
I don't think we should change everything. There's a big risk that we
get "fix-happy" and change stuff that doesn't really make an
improvement. Personally, I like =~ because it has a nice analogy to the
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Higher order functions
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 4 August 2000
Last Modified: 17 August 2000
Version: 3
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 23
=head
(I'm assuming you intended this for perl6-language)
"Myers, Dirk" wrote:
>
> > I certainly don't want m,
> > tr, or s to go away (or /regex/ either.) But the =~ bothers me. How
> > about disallowing m{...} and using m{expr}/.../?
>
> How about this, for the really compact way to do it:
>
>
David Corbin wrote:
>
> Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
> >
> >
> > So how do I make C into an array in the first place? Well, I say
> > something like C. But wait -- that's ambiguous! Is
> > C now a copy of the list (1,2,3) (in which case it's an array),
> > or is it a reference to (1,2,3) (in which c
Everyone: Please continue this discussion on -objects. Thanks.
-Nate
Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Ensuring Perl's object-oriented future
>
> =head1 VERSION
>
> Maintainer: John Siracusa
>%professors{ $a->name cmp $b->name };
>
>%students{ $$students{$b}{GPA} <=> $$students{$a}{GPA} };
These already mean something. Please don't "special-case" them.
Isn't this better handled with a (revamped and faster) tie?
tie %professors, 'Tie::Sorted', ^a->name cmp
"Stephen P. Potter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Socket functions (such as C, C, etc) should be moved from
> the core to modules/libraries.
> * Math functions (such as C, C, C, etc) should be moved
> from the core to modules/libraries.
> * IPC functions (such as C, C, C, etc) should be
>
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Huh? They need to be "globals", because the "with" mechanism
> is going to have to be able to write them into a symbol table.
> You can't do this with lexicals.
Yes, you can. For an approach like this, the hash needs to be a
pseudo-hash anyway.
-- Joha
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Ensuring Perl's object-oriented future
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Aug 16 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 126
=head1 ABS
Damian Conway wrote:
> So C is going to have to do some pretty freaky magic to work out
> it should call that sub as part of the C. And call it with a
> specifically ordered argument list.
Yes, I never said it would work, just that it looked nicer :)
> However, your suggestion *did* s
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Sort order for any hash
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 124
=head1 ABSTRACT
Herein a new syntax is
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Builtin: lazy
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 123
=head1 ABSTRACT
C is suggested as a keyword to m
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
types and structures
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 122
=head1 ABSTRACT
We adopt C base types, a
Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
>
> Karl Glazebrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > o Why do I think perl has too much line noise? Because of code like this:
> >
> > @{$x->{$$fred{Blah}}}[1..3]
>
> This is indeed horrible. However, I fail to see how cutting out the
> "line noise" would m
> > This seems less of a leap of logic/faith:
> > %record = loadrecord($studentID);
> > with %record {
> > print < > Dear ^name:
> > Your tuition is now due. Please send in a payment of at least
> > ^minumum.
> > SPAM
> > };
"I do not thin' t
Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
>
>
> So how do I make C into an array in the first place? Well, I say
> something like C. But wait -- that's ambiguous! Is
> C now a copy of the list (1,2,3) (in which case it's an array),
> or is it a reference to (1,2,3) (in which case it's a scalar)? In the
> first
> This is one of the nice things about Python, in my opinion. Every
> error is an exception, so you can feel free to completely ignore
Like end of file? :-)
> Hmm. It just occurred to me that you could combine your idea with
> exceptions quite nicely: All core functions throw exceptions on
> e
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 01:07:30PM -0400, Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> > * Replace C, C, and C with equivalent regularized
> > functions that take mulitple arguments instead of using specialized
> > syntax. It would be best if the names could be more "complete", like
> > match(), translate(
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 01:19:22PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> I recently suggested in p5p that for many system calls it could be
> checked in *consta...darn, *compile* time whether they are used in
> void contect, and _abort_. "No, I'm not going to let you get away
> with doing a chdir() a
> "SPP" == Stephen P Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SPP> * The match operator, C, is always required (bare C
SPP> becomes a fatal error).
maybe
SPP> * Replace C with flag to C, and remove special meaning
SPP> of C.
yes
SPP> * Socket functions (such as C, C, etc) should be mo
Thus it was written in the epistle of Steve Fink,
> Bah. I will claim neither that being easy to learn is Perl's main goal,
> nor that I know what Perl's main goal is, but I have enough of an
> intuition (or did I misspell "opinion"?) to assert that ease of learning
> is a far more important _benc
Karl Glazebrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> o Why do I think perl has too much line noise? Because of code like this:
>
> @{$x->{$$fred{Blah}}}[1..3]
This is indeed horrible. However, I fail to see how cutting out the
"line noise" would make it easier to decipher (I can, however, se
Karl Glazebrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> o Why do I think perl has too much line noise? Because of code like this:
> @{$x->{$$fred{Blah}}}[1..3]
You're taking the value of the key "Blah" in the hash referred to by $fred
and using it as the key into the hash referred to by $x, treating th
Ted Ashton wrote:
>
> Thus it was written in the epistle of Russ Allbery,
> >
> > This falls firmly in the category of things that are powerful for
> > experienced users of the language but may be somewhat difficult to learn.
> > I don't think Perl has being easy to learn as it's primary goal, no
"Myers, Dirk" wrote:
>
> Karl Glazebrook wrote:
>
> > But what is $x[3] ?
>
> > It could be a scalar.
>
> > BUT it could be a reference to a list.
>
> > It could be a reference to a 2D PDL image.
>
> ... but references are scalar. So, $x[3] *is* a scalar.
>
> That scalar could be a refe
Karl Glazebrook wrote:
> But what is $x[3] ?
> It could be a scalar.
> BUT it could be a reference to a list.
> It could be a reference to a 2D PDL image.
... but references are scalar. So, $x[3] *is* a scalar.
That scalar could be a reference to a list. It could be a reference to a 2D
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 09:19:20AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> Do we want to come up with any modifications to the scope of $! (I'm not
> talking about the dual string-number nature)? I've occasionally been
> flummoxed by looking at it when there hadn't really been an error (but it's
> set any
Dave Storrs wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > 2) "express" should guarantee that, before it creates a variable
> > > names $FOO, it first calls "local" on any existing $FOO
> >
> > Why, if the variable is lexical (see 3)?
>
> D
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 01:07:30PM -0400, Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> * Replace C, C, and C with equivalent regularized
> functions that take mulitple arguments instead of using specialized
> syntax. It would be best if the names could be more "complete", like
> match(), translate(), and sub
This seems good...the HOF stuff seems to have pretty well accepted, and
the thumbtack notation with it.
Dave
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Clayton Scott wrote:
> > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
> > > %record = loadrecord($studentID);
> > > with %record
D'oh. s{2) .+^}{}
Mismatch between brain and fingers there somewhere, thanks for
pointing it out.
Dave
On 17 Aug 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 2) "express" should guarantee that, before it creates a v
* Stephen P. Potter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [18 Aug 2000 03:06]:
> I don't see these ideas in RFCs:
[Reordered a bit and some items removed]
> * Socket (such as C, C, etc)
> * Math (such as C, C, C, etc)
> * IPC (such as C, C, C, etc)
> * "User" (C, , C, C)
> * Group (C, C, C)
> * Network (C, C, C,
I don't see these ideas in RFCs:
* The match operator, C, is always required (bare C becomes a fatal
error).
* Replace C with flag to C, and remove special meaning of C.
* Socket functions (such as C, C, etc) should be moved from
the core to modules/libraries.
* Math functions (such as C, C,
Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
>
> > Anyone for generalizing "select" to a more general "with" keyword
> > which would operate on a limited hash and be syntactic sugar for
> > replacing all appearances of unqualified variables that match
> > the hash's keys wit
Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2) "express" should guarantee that, before it creates a variable
> names $FOO, it first calls "local" on any existing $FOO
Why, if the variable is lexical (see 3)?
-- Johan
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> > What should happen when the expression given to C, or
> > C evaluates to a negative number? I see three options:
[...]
> >
> > 3) C would then act as C and C would
> >act as C
> >
> I like #3 too, does that make a better conse
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
> Anyone for generalizing "select" to a more general "with" keyword
> which would operate on a limited hash and be syntactic sugar for
> replacing all appearances of unqualified variables that match
> the hash's keys with references into it?
>
>
Do we want to come up with any modifications to the scope of $! (I'm not
talking about the dual string-number nature)? I've occasionally been
flummoxed by looking at it when there hadn't really been an error (but it's
set anyway, randomly it seems); or calling some module method that failed
a
Data::Dumper has been a very useful list debugging tool, for a very unneccessary
problem.
What are these?
$x[$a][$b]
$x->[$a]->[$b]
${$x[$a]}->[$b]
We wish to believe that there are no pointers in Perl, just references. We are
lying to ourselves.
The desire to have $x->[$a] rather than just $x
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> "Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
> >
> > ... is the cause for this. All the discussion is taking place in the
> > master list before the sublists are spawned. You can only express the
> > opinion that foo is not bar and never should be so many times.
>
> I
John Porter writes:
> > push is _not_ a method. @var is not an object.
>
> You are deluded.
This is a highly unproductive avenue of discourse.
Let the people who want to drop punctuation propose dropping
punctuation. Arguing about it won't change their mind, but it will
(a) piss everyone of
Chaim Frenkel writes:
> The other magic variables would simply end up as some funny 8-bit
> characters floating around. With one's handy (several thousand page)
> translation table one can then interpret the meaning.
That's insane. We're trying to get rid of special variables named
after obscure
To go through a few points that has arisen:
o Why do I think "@" is useless?
OK clearly @x is a list. Good old perl4.
But what is $x[3] ?
It could be a scalar.
BUT it could be a reference to a list.
It could be a reference to a 2D PDL image.
etc.
so clearly we have no real i
I think hash assignment within regex's would be more useful than
variable assignment (though there's no reason there couldn't be both,
I suppose). Here's a copy of something I sent to p5p a while back:
I suggest that (?%field_name: pattern) spit out 'field_name', in
addition to the matched p
Chaim Frenkel wrote:
>
> In a hash exists() is a valid concept. In an array (even a sparse one)
> exists() has no meaning. The data is always there. The sparsity is
> an implementational detail.
WADR, exists() could -- even if it doesn't currently -- have a defined
meaning for arrays:
m
raptor wrote:
> RFC 25 (v1): Multiway comparisons
> ...
> I think the idea of leaving the value "j" in "i > j" is cool...
RFC 84.
--
John Porter
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
> > John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > foo = bar;
> > >
> > > foo could be just about anything: a string, a hashref, some other
> > > blessed ref (with op"=" possibly overloaded!), or even an lvalue sub.
> > > Do you k
Jon Ericson wrote:
> John Porter wrote:
> > ...all variable types (scalar, array, hash) are simply objects.
>
> Not in Perl.
Yes, in perl.
> $dog and $cat are objects. $dog can bark and $cat can scratch. The
> author of the module (Zoo::Animal?) should have documented these
> methods.
And
Mike Pastore wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, John Porter wrote:
> > grep() always treats its "second" arg as a list, even if it's a scalar,
> > or some other list-of-one (or none); and grep() always returns a list,
> > even if it's a list of one (or none).
>
> True on the first part, false on the s
Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
> John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > foo = bar;
> >
> > foo could be just about anything: a string, a hashref, some other
> > blessed ref (with op"=" possibly overloaded!), or even an lvalue sub.
> > Do you know? Should you care?
>
> I don't know, but I think
Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "Jeremy Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whispered:
| No. They are lazily evaluated and require special optimisations to allow
I don't completely understand this whole lazy evaluation, so I'm confused
how these functions would work on them. Explain to me how you
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Michael Fowler wrote:
> So what's insufficient about:
>
> print <<"EOF";
> Stuff
> More stuff
> Even more stuff
> EOF
Others have already mentioned the "have to count the number of spaces"
argument. Another one that comes to mind is: assu
On 16 Aug 2000, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > "BB" == Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> BB> I am assuming that the system clocks are set accurately to UTC (or some
> BB> derivative, like (US) Eastern Standard Time). UTC is what time-servers
> BB> report. UTC has leap seconds, which a
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 01:07:24PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> > At 08:03 PM 8/16/00 +, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> > >Perl should provide a mechanism to have common code autoloaded from a
> > >file.
> >
> > Please, no. It's the ultimate sc
RFC 25 (v1): Multiway comparisons
and now snip from the Icon language :
http://www.cs.arizona.edu/icon/docs/ipd266.htm
2.1 Conditional Expressions
In Icon there are conditional expressions that may succeed and produce a
result, or may fail and not produce any result. An example is the compariso
=head1 REFERENCE
Icon language brief intro :
http://www.cs.arizona.edu/icon/intro.htm
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley writes:
> > > > The $a and $b of the sort comparator were A Bad Idea to begin with.
> > >
> > > Ditto. Can we ditch these in Perl 6? Don't see why $_[0] and $_[1] can't
> > > be used, or even a more standard $1 and $2. Either one makes
hi,
> > So how is that different from:
> >
> > do BLOCK1 until do BLOCK2
>
> It's the same.
> But the real fun starts when blocks and functions can suspend and
> resume.
>
>{ ...
> # Return value and suspend.
> suspend $i;
> # Next iteration will resume here
> ...
>} a
hi jeremy, all,
here is one simple example , let say we have this XML file:
how we can implement the following XPath expression - "file://code"
I'm giving here very simplified example (orthen works as shown in first
interpretation i
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >
> > Composer::Post.assumes(Iterator.each(Iterator.all(List)=="Programmers")
> > ->programs=(Language::Programming.uses("Perl")==true &&
> > Methodology.implemented(Style.OO==true,Time.all==true)))==true;
>
> Not at al
> =head1 DESCRIPTION
>
> Many other programs have so called "resource configuration" files (at
> least that's what I call them) that are loaded and interpretted upon
> program startup. Some example programs that have this ability include
> bash, mutt, and python. Perl should do the same.
>
> A
Steve Simmons wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:03:31PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> > Perl should provide a mechanism to have common code autoloaded from a
> > file. . . .
>
> > A C file could be used to set system-wide defaults that
> > the system administrator would like to prom
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Peter Scott wrote:
[...]
> >Ask, can you change the deadlines on these lists to be "as long as it
> >takes" or similar?
>
> Sorry I didn't chime in earlier, but I would like to say that I prefer
> published deadlines. Reason: people will talk for as long as you give
> 'em
99 matches
Mail list logo
