r30059 - in docs/Perl6/Spec: . S32-setting-library
Author: vamped Date: 2010-03-13 12:07:29 +0100 (Sat, 13 Mar 2010) New Revision: 30059 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Containers.pod Log: changed scalar context into item context as per S02 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod 2010-03-13 00:47:56 UTC (rev 30058) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod 2010-03-13 11:07:29 UTC (rev 30059) @@ -317,9 +317,9 @@ would be downgraded in context. Cord goes the other direction; it takes a string value and returns -character values as integers. In a scalar context, the return value +character values as integers. In item context, the return value is the just the integer value of the first character in the string. In -a list context, the return value is the list of integers representing +list context, the return value is the list of integers representing the entire string. The definition of character is pragma dependent. Normally it's a grapheme id, but under codepoints or bytes scopes, the string is coerced to the appropriate low-level view and interpreted Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Containers.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Containers.pod 2010-03-13 00:47:56 UTC (rev 30058) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Containers.pod 2010-03-13 11:07:29 UTC (rev 30059) @@ -582,7 +582,7 @@ dimension, and works with Array References. Csplice returns a CParcel of the deleted elements, which behaves as -expected in either list or scalar context. +expected in either list or item context. =item unshift
r30065 - docs/Perl6/Spec
Author: Darren_Duncan Date: 2010-03-14 01:05:21 +0100 (Sun, 14 Mar 2010) New Revision: 30065 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod Log: the '%','mod' are the 'modulo' op; 'modulus' is either what you call the result besides 'remainder', or it is another name for 'absolute value' op Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod 2010-03-13 23:18:57 UTC (rev 30064) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod 2010-03-14 00:05:21 UTC (rev 30065) @@ -771,18 +771,18 @@ =item * -C infix:% , modulus +C infix:% , modulo $x % $y If necessary, coerces non-numeric arguments to an appropriate CNumeric type, -then calculates the modulus, which is defines as: +then calculates the remainder, which is defines as: $x % $y == $x - floor($x / $y) * $y =item * -C infix:mod , generic modulus +C infix:mod , generic modulo $x mod $y Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod 2010-03-13 23:18:57 UTC (rev 30064) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod 2010-03-14 00:05:21 UTC (rev 30065) @@ -798,7 +798,7 @@ $num1 % $num2 -Does a floating point modulus operation, i.e. 5.5 % 1 == 0.5 and 5 % 2.5 == 0. +Does a floating point modulo operation, i.e. 5.5 % 1 == 0.5 and 5 % 2.5 == 0. =item dbmopen, dbmclose
Re: r29931 - docs/Perl6/Spec
I think I found a Synopsis fossil, in light of revision 29931, but wanted to be sure ... pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: Author: lwall Date: 2010-03-03 18:34:04 +0100 (Wed, 03 Mar 2010) New Revision: 29931 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod Log: [S02] remove 1/2 and +2-3i literal forms, now rely on angle dwimmery for literals, or constant folding otherwise. snip Complex literals are similarly indicated by writing an addition or subtraction of -two real numbers without spaces: +two real numbers (again, without spaces around the operators) inside angles: -5.2+1e42i -3-1i +5.2+1e42i + -3-1i As with rational literals, constant folding would produce the same complex number, but this form parses as a single term, ignoring surrounding precedence. snip Basically, I found this line in Synopsis 2, in the section talking about unspace: 1+3\ i; So the question is about whether this example should be kept as still valid code or whether it is now invalid and a fossil? I suspect it *is* still valid, at least if this by itself: 3i ... is a valid literal denoting 0+3i, but wanted to check. -- Darren Duncan
Re: r29931 - docs/Perl6/Spec
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 08:53:02PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote: : Basically, I found this line in Synopsis 2, in the section talking about unspace: : : 1+3\ i; : : So the question is about whether this example should be kept as : still valid code or whether it is now invalid and a fossil? : : I suspect it *is* still valid, at least if this by itself: : : 3i : : ... is a valid literal denoting 0+3i, but wanted to check. Yes, both of those are still valid. Thanks. In fact, the \ is required if you want to use a variable: $foo + $bar\i Well, I suppose you could also write that as: $foo + ($bar)i but that could be construed as clunkier. Or at least more typing. Larry
