Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
I think I like the idea, and the patch seems safe. What I don't like,
though, is the lack of tests for this patch. Also, a minor concern is
that people might unknowingly write non-backwards-compatible code with
5.10 by using this construct.
Some basic
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 08:10:20AM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 04:41:56PM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
On 9/5/05, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any other feedback on making
(LIST)[LIST]-
not need the -?
I think I
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:41:36PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 06:07:11AM -0700, japhy @ perlmonk. org wrote:
In 'perlref', item #3 of 'Using References' says
One more thing here. The arrow is optional between brackets sub-
scripts, so you can
On 9/5/05, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any other feedback on making
(LIST)[LIST]-
not need the -?
I think I like the idea, and the patch seems safe. What I don't like,
though, is the lack of tests for this patch. Also, a minor concern is
that people might unknowingly
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 04:41:56PM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
On 9/5/05, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any other feedback on making
(LIST)[LIST]-
not need the -?
I think I like the idea, and the patch seems safe. What I don't like,
though, is the lack of
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:41:36PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
BTW, cygwin only has bison 1.875b, not the allowed 1.875 or 1.875c,
but it seemed to work. I also note that Debian stable has 1.875d;
would it make sense to just allow any 1.875* version?
--- p/regen_perly.pl.orig
On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 02:38:14AM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:41:36PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
BTW, cygwin only has bison 1.875b, not the allowed 1.875 or 1.875c,
but it seemed to work. I also note that Debian stable has 1.875d;
would it
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 06:07:11AM -0700, japhy @ perlmonk. org wrote:
In 'perlref', item #3 of 'Using References' says
One more thing here. The arrow is optional between brackets sub-
scripts, so you can shrink the above down to
$array[$x]{foo}[0] = January;
This led me to
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:41:36PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 06:07:11AM -0700, japhy @ perlmonk. org wrote:
sub foo { ...; return @data }
my $x = (foo())[0][1];
which would have the same effect as
my @return = foo();
my $x =
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 09:20:07PM -0400, Rick Delaney wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:41:36PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 06:07:11AM -0700, japhy @ perlmonk. org wrote:
sub foo { ...; return @data }
my $x = (foo())[0][1];
which would
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 08:09:41PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 09:20:07PM -0400, Rick Delaney wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 05:41:36PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 06:07:11AM -0700, japhy @ perlmonk. org wrote:
sub foo
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 08:09:41PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 09:20:07PM -0400, Rick Delaney wrote:
What is
my $x = (foo())[0..5][1];
supposed to mean? I know it will return (foo())[5][1] but is it a good
idea to support this syntax when it
On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 08:20:17PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
A warning would be good, but I don't think it's necessary before applying
my patch, and presumably it would also apply to
@array[0..5]-[1];
I mean (foo())[0..5]-[1];
whereas
@array[ (0..5)[-1]
# New Ticket Created by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Please include the string: [perl #37039]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37039
This is a bug report for perl from [EMAIL PROTECTED],
generated with the
14 matches
Mail list logo
