I just commited into bleadperl a patch that implements this :
$ ./perl -e 'no 5'
Perls since v5.0.0 too modern--this is v5.9.3, stopped at -e line 1.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at -e line 1.
That is, the exact opposite of the current "use VERSION" syntax.
One of the uses I had
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> Basically, I'd like to be able to mark a variable as "sensitive" or
> "secret". This implies that the language should overwrite the memory
> it uses before deallocating it, and that if possible it should tell
> the virtual memory system to
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> I would like "is sensitive" to be defined to mean that any data stored
> in that variable, at any level of recursion, will be zeroed out as
> soon as it is garbage collected. Particular implementations can add
> extra features on top of t
Smylers wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> Hmmm, a pragma's a bit heavyweight for this; how about being able to set
> this with a special global variable -- that sure sounds handy ...
Actually, in perl 5, $[ *is* a pragma... :)
--
Grepping the source is good for the soul. -- the perldebguts manpag
Moritz Lenz wrote in perl.perl6.compiler :
> jerry gay wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:43, via RT Moritz Lenz
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> # New Ticket Created by Moritz Lenz
>>> # Please include the string: [perl #60732]
>>> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this
Richard Hainsworth wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> The S16: chown, chmod thread seems to be too unix-focussed.
I was more or less thinking that the syscall-related primitives,
like chown or chmod, could go in a POSIX namespace. Even in UNIX
land nowadays the situation can be much more complex tha
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> My only dream is that by this time next year we have a fully-
> functional-people-can-use-it-in-production Perl6. It doesn't even
> have to be 100% complete; I think just 85% would be enough if it were
> the right 85%.
20% would be enough if
david nicol wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] perl -le '$_{a}=27; package notmain; print $_{a}'
> 27
>
> Gosh!
>
> Let's document it! Would it go in perlvar or perlsyn?
It's already documented, in perlvar/"Technical Note on the Syntax of Variable Names"
(at the end)
Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 12:11:59AM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>: When you say CHECK time, do you mean there'll be a CHECK phase for
>: code that gets required at run time?
>
> Dunno about that. When I say CHECK time I'm primarily referring
> to the end
Joe Gottman wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>This is unrelated to the problem you mentioned, but there is another
> annoying problem with sort as it is currently defined. If you have an
> @array and you want to replace it with the sorted version, you have to type
> @array = sort @array;
>
Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> In theory, yes, if you ask it to check in a CHECK block, and if you're
> willing for the check to assume that no eval or INIT block is going
> to supply the missing sub before it's actually called, and that no
> run-time code is going to alias the sub
Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>: In perl 5 those blocks are executed at the
>: transition between the compilation and the execution phase *of the main
>: program*. This is convenient for some purposes (the O and B::* modules)
>: and inconvient for others (Attribute::Handlers, etc. etc.)
Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> Possibly a CHECK block that is compiled after end of main compilation
> should translate itself to a UNITCHECK. But maybe it should be an error.
>
> But it's also possible that CHECK should mean "unit check", and
> there should be an explicit MAINCHE
Damian Conway wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> I'd favour UNITCHECK and CHECK, mainly for the greater compatibility with
> Perl 5 and with software engineering jargon.
As far as Perl 5 is concerned, it appears that most people who write
CHECK mean UNITCHECK. Including you :)
> And because MAIN
Andy Wardley wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> I'm so happy! I just found out, totally by accident, that I can type
> the « and » characters by pressing AltGr + Z and AltGr + X,
> respectively.
Of course this information is almost completely unusable without knowing
your OS, your locale, and you
Aaron Sherman wrote:
> Is it a special type of calling convention, e.g.:
>
> sub s (Regex $pat, Str $replace, bool ?$i) is doublequotelike returns(Str) {
Ooh, "doublequotelike" sounds so much 1984.
(Moreover it doesn't describe accurately the reality, which allows to
use different delimiter
Luke Palmer wrote:
> Also, if this is going to be an explanation rather than just a picture,
> I suggest you go with Perl's usual versatile power, and store the
> operators in a declarative data source.
>
> grammar RPN {
> my @operator = << + - * / >>;
>
> rule input { * }
>
Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> * To really show where P6 rocks, you need to show dynamic features. A
> simple example might be using a language with keywords kept in
> variables, allowing you change between e.g. "for, while, if", "pour,
> tandis-que, si", etc.
Small correction : "pour, tant_que, si
Luke Palmer wrote:
> That left recursion won't do. I can't remember my transformation rules
> well enough to know how to put that in a form suitable for a recursive
> descent parser. To be honest, I've never seen an RPN calculator modeled
> with a grammar.
Well, the main advantage of an RPM synt
Michele Dondi wrote:
> I must say I've still not read all apocalypses, and OTOH I suspect that
> this could be done more or less easily with a custom function (provided
> that variables will have a method to keep track of their history, or, more
> reasonably, will be *allowed* to have it), but I wo
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 11:41:05 +0100, Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there some syntax to express if the struct is packed or
> needs alignment? (Perhaps that would be needed per element.)
Why am I suddenly thinking about unions ?
Aaron Sherman wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> A silly question: is there a canonical character set from which we
> extract these ranges? Are we hard-coding Unicode here, or is there some
> way for the user to specify the character set for ranges?
Perl 5 forces [a-z] (or [i-j] for that matter) t
Autrijus Tang wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> 4. Software Transaction Memory
>
> Like GHC Haskell, Fortress introduces the `atomic` operator that takes a
> block, and ensures that any code running inside the block, in a
> concurrent setting, must happen transactionally -- i.e. if some
> precondi
David M. Lloyd wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> > > Backtracking is at the heart of Logic Programming (or Declarative
> > > Programming, if you like). This is one of the 3 main programming paradigms
> > > (along with procedural and functional). The most popular Declarativ
good men...};
}
} since useful defaults are always good.
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
On 2002.01.21 18:32 Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 10:58:34PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> > : while( my $line = ) {
> > : ...
> > : }
> >
> > That still works fine--it's just that $line lives on after the while.
>
> This creeping lexical leakage bothers me. W
tain
# if statements
}
# but $? is foo() here
}
(is "temporarized" the correct word, now that local() goes away?)
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
o, it can insert a fake ';' token after "do { ... }\n" for the
parser.
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
xer is very complex (and highly stateful, as opposed as
pure-lex lexers). I don't know how much of the complexity of the lexer
can be reinserted back into the grammar for perl 6.
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
If strain on the lexer were a design criterion, I blew it long ago.
-- Larry Wall, recently
Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> Such a grammar switching routine could operate either over a lexical
> scope or over the rest of the file. The only restriction is that
> one module not clobber the grammar of a different module.
>
> Basically, we're trying to make the opposite mist
Dan Sugalski wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> Don't forget, we already change parsing rules at compile time. Perl's
> got three (maybe four) different sets of rules as it is:
>
>*) Normal perl
>*) Regexes
>*) Double-quoted strings
>*) Single-quoted strings
>
> Adding another,
Larry Wall wrote :
>
> It's not clear that the lexer is a separate entity any more. Lexers
> were originally invented as a way of abstracting out part of the
> grammar so that it could be done in a separate pass, and to simplify
> the grammar for the poor overworked parser.
Indeed. Another bene
Brent Dax wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> I believe that the tokenizer remembers whether it's expecting a binary
> operator or Something Else. That's how it handles things like
> vs. numeric less-than (<).
Indeed : that's why
print $FH1 <$FH2>;
produces a syntax error.
--
If strain on the
nge that actively.)
Work on a more recent bleadperl and watch t/japh/abigail.t ;-)
> BTW, so far toke.c hasn't been as bad as I've heard it is. :^)
Once you're used to it, it's surprisingly clear.
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez : http://rgarciasuarez.free.fr/
re variants \z and \Z.
This needs (IMHO) some reshaping.
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
I'll better skip() some releases until it is() ok() to use Test::More
without() going insane(). Any more than I already am, that is().
-- Tels in the perl-qa mailing list
Larry Wall wrote :
>
> Well, if anything, we're going the other direction, and enriching what
> you can do with a backslash in single quotes slightly. But it ought
> to be pretty easy to define your own hyperquotes. We might also have
> options on quotes like we do on regexen. Then we could te
Larry Wall wrote :
>
> Paragraph mode is not going away--it's merely going elsewhere. :-)
>
>: If so, what's the rationale? Another case of "you can't do it right
>: internationally, so better not to do it at all"?
>
> No, it's simply that using a global variable to control something
> that s
ced at
compile-time (in fact, at tokenizing-time) by the appropriate constants.
The question is : to which kind of bytecode MY.file (etc.) get compiled ?
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez : http://use.perl.org/~rafael/
Dan Sugalski wrote :
>
> And, FWIW, emacs is written in C. Granted a much macro-mutated
> version of C, but C nonetheless.
Just like Perl 5 ;-)
Matthew Zimmerman wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> So let me make my original question a little more general: are Perl 6 source
> files encoded in Latin-1, UTF-8, or will Perl 6 provide some sort of
> translation mechanism, like specifying the charset on the command line?
I expect probably some
Austin Hastings wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> What we've got is an encoding problem at the MUA level. Mark Reed says
> my mailer (Yahoo!) tagged a message containing high-bit characters as
> US-ASCII. Several people the other day reported on the differences in
> UTF8 vs. Latin-1 handling amon
John Williams wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> While "purge" is cute, it certainly is not obvious what it does. Of
> course neither is "grep" unless you are an aging unix guru...
>
> How about something which is at least obvious to someone who knows what
> grep is, such as "vgrep" or "grep:v"?
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
> > Which basically comes down to this: an id represents a location in
> > memory for any objects that don't override the .id method.
>
> Aiee! No! Please don't let things override the address-in-memory method,
> as
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Like I said, you can always use delegation to subclass an array,
> or limit yourself to an odd and restrictive subset of behaviour.
> (Basically just vtable method overriding)
Delegation has drawbacks compared to inheritance : you can't use
a object that
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There are in fact *two* types associated with any Perl variable:
>
> 1. Its "storage type" (i.e. the type(s) of value it can hold)
> This is specified before the variable or after an C or C.
> It defaults to Scalar.
>
>
frederic fabbro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can one see it as a shell redirection/pipe? This may sound funny,
> but is the following ok?
>@b <~ @a ~> @c; # @c = @b = @a;
> (@b <~ @a) ~> @c; # same order i guess
>
> so one can also:
> @keep <~ grep /good/ <~ @list ~> gre
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not necessarily. <~ will necessarily need to be right-associative,
> while ~> left, however.
Not sure if you aren't getting this backwards, but anyway I often find
myself confused with right and left.
> It would be logical to give them the same
> prece
Nicholas Clark wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>> Actually I don't think you can define a grammar where two operators have
>> the same precedence but different associativity. Be it a pure BNF
>> grammar, or a classical yacc specification (using the %left and %right
>> declarations).
>
> But that wo
Dave Whipp wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> But with the different precedence. At last, I can assign from a list without
> using parentheses:
>
> @a = 1, 2, 3; # newbie error
> @a <~ 1, 2, 3; # would work
or :
@a <~ 1 <~ 2 <~ 3;
or :
1, 2, 3 ~> @a;
which would be also written as :
John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, er, don't we need to decide what the subroutine attribute is, so that
> the compiler will know to honor it and make the code "disappear"? It
> doesn't seem like a feature that can be added from "userland" after the fact
> (but maybe I'm wrong...)
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> And keyboards, don't forget keyboards. These pesky primitive ones we
> have now would require a lot of shift-control-alt-meta-cokebottle key
> sequences...
And vt100 consoles ! There are still sysadmins that struggle with a buggy
perl script, having r
Brent Dax wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> Yes, I know this means that we have 'else if' instead of 'elsif', but
> it's only two more characters and it makes the grammar cleaner.
The tokeniser could send two tokens "else" and "if" whenever it
recognizes the keyword "elsif" -- so this isn't a probl
Joseph F. Ryan wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> I think the point of having C as a sub rather than as a separate
> syntax is so the parser doesn't have to do anything special for
> special keywords.
>
> I think the goal was to simplify the compiler, but with the
> discussion of recent weeks, it
Joseph F. Ryan wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> If the final design stays the way it is now, there really won't be
> a "lexer". Instead, a perl6 grammar parses the data, and builds up
> a huge match-object as it, well, matches. This match object is then
> munged into the optree.
Oh, yes, I re
Andy Wardley wrote:
>
> If my understanding of the design of Perl 6 is correct, the lexer, parser
> and any other related components will be highly configurable and/or
> replaceable. The goal is to provide support for "little languages" by
> separating Perl the language from perl the interpreter
Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> class Foo {
> ...
> std::size_t spare = 0
> std::size_t allocate = 4096
> std::size_t min_readline = 80
>
> and have the compiler know that if I specify a member initialiser in my
> my constructor, then that should be used, otherwise to default to using
>
56 matches
Mail list logo
