At 12:19 10/06/2005 +0200, you wrote:
On Saturday 04 June 2005 20:29, Clement Cherlin wrote:
I include a patch I made for the above problems. Some of the changes are
kind of kludgey, so I would appreciate comments and suggestions on how to
improve them.
Thanks, applied.
Please, revert this
This is inspired inpart by discussions I had on #perl6.
Basically what is the behavour of the hyperop when applied to two
hashes. The concensus was that the hashes would get unrolled into
lists, and the pairs would get matched up more or less randomly.
I don't feel that this is a
# New Ticket Created by Chip Salzenberg
# Please include the string: [perl #36283]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36283
It makes sense to allow e.g. C$P0 = add $P1, $P2 as alternative
syntax for Cadd
Bob Rogers wrote:
So, IMHO, it seems more versatile to have these opcodes operate on
one arg/return at a time, instead of monolithically on the whole list:
set_arg index, flags, val
If somehow possible, I'd really like to avoid indirect register
addressing. The register allocator
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:48:06AM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Bob Rogers wrote:
So, IMHO, it seems more versatile to have these opcodes operate on
one arg/return at a time, instead of monolithically on the whole list:
set_arg index, flags, val
If somehow possible, I'd really
Following a conversation with Chip on IRC, is this
my @y := @foo[0..][1];
legal?
Hi,
As I know, for binding, you can use the := operator, and just this:
$a := $b;
I would like to make a proposal, based on Ruby[1]:
alias $a, $b;
It's a fun:
sub newline {
\n x $_;
}
alias newlines, newline;
So you can write:
print 5.enters;
Currently, you have to
{Pre-Post-Script: After all this trouble below, which is hairy and yet
not even complete, parameter-by-parameter conversion is actually
starting to look good for complex cases. Despite all my reasons
against it. I start to suspect that we need both; that get_params
can be used for cases that
Hi,
sub proxy () is rw {
return new Proxy:
FETCH = { 42 },
STORE = - $new { 23 };
}
say proxy();# 42
say proxy() = 40; # 40, 23, or 42?
Currently I think the last line should output 40, consider:
sub innocent_sub ($var is copy) {
my $foo =
This:
multi sub is_equal(Integer $a, Integer where { $_ == $a } $b: ) { 1 }
hurts. At least as I've been given to understand it[*], is impossible
to implement, because the second parameter's type can't be precalculated
in order to prepare for MMD dispatching.
The type object describing $b
On Sunday 12 June 2005 16:28, Will Coleda via RT wrote:
Jens - is this still an issue?
yes. I've no clue whats wrong. Maybe its a perl 5.6.0 bug.
I don't know how to fix it.
jens
On 6/13/05, Patrick R. Michaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since it might not have been clear from my earlier post -- I've
now committed the S17 framework draft into the repository. Thanks.
I am now questioning using Perl6 Timeline By Apocolypse as reference
material. I am rather interested in
On 14 Jun 2005 06:07:10 -, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
multi sub infix_circumfix_meta_operator:{'',''} (Hash %a,Hash %b,Code
$op) {
my Hash %return;
for intersection(keys %a,keys %b) - $key {
%return{$key} =
I'd like a ruling that ?CALLER::BLOCK is not a general-purpose
block promoter, but only works if the calling block already marked
itself as callable, perhaps by mentioning ?BLOCK in its body.
First, I like the idea that all blocks act as if they were subs WRT
being callable and accepting
Luke Palmer wrote:
On 14 Jun 2005 06:07:10 -, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
multi sub infix_circumfix_meta_operator:{'',''} (Hash %a,Hash %b,Code $op) {
my Hash %return;
for intersection(keys %a,keys %b) - $key {
%return{$key} =
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:43:42PM +0200, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
Chip Salzenberg wrote:
This:
multi sub is_equal(Integer $a, Integer where { $_ == $a } $b: ) { 1 }
hurts. At least as I've been given to understand it[*], is impossible
to implement, because the second parameter's type
Hi,
Just wanted to say the same. All my questions starting as How to...
and Is this... are just to trivial to ask here :)
OTOH as there is no global Perl5 list (AFAIK, at least), these things
should go to the regional mail-lists - later on. However, at this
phase of develpment of
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:27:20PM +0200, Fagyal Csongor wrote:
Just wanted to say the same. All my questions starting as How to...
and Is this... are just to trivial to ask here :)
- Fagzal
I would have some general Perl6 programming questions. Where should I
ask them? It's not about
Hi,
Just wanted to say the same. All my questions starting as How to...
and Is this... are just to trivial to ask here :)
- Fagzal
I would have some general Perl6 programming questions. Where should I
ask them? It's not about language design, not about
compiling/compilers and even not
On Jun 14, 2005, at 4:52 PM, BÁRTHÁZI András wrote:
Topics both on the IRC channel and on the mailings lists are high-
level ones, and not for beginners. I think, a new mailing list
would be good for get some new members for the Perl 6 community,
too, where they can ask basic questions.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:54:45PM +0200, BÁRTHÁZI András wrote:
I would have some general Perl6 programming questions. Where should I ask
them? It's not about language design, not about compiling/compilers and
even not related to the internals.
As more and more people will start hacking
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:13:08PM +0200, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: It therefore would a Bad Thing if ?CALLER::BLOCK worked generally.
: If the caller _is_ a block that was already marked at compile time as
: requiring full sub properties then, of course, it's no problem to use
: the syntax
Hi,
I'm busy with creating a widget based web templating engine, but I have
some problems, please help me. The engine would allow you to define
widgets, and use those in your templates. I would like it to be an OO
module.
In the template, you can write this:
server:input id=name
Hi,
So, that leaves either perl6-language or a new list. Personally I
could see it going either way -- even though general Perl6 programming
questions aren't directly about language design, it may still be
useful to language designers to see the types of questions that
people are asking and to
Hi,
Anyway, I understand why you wrote what you wrote, so as there will be no
decision, I'll ask my questions on perl6-compiler.
I mean, perl6-language.
Bye,
Andras
Hi,
BRTHZI Andrs wrote:
$wte = new WTE;
$wte.register('input', my_input_widget);
I don't prefer it, to be 20-30 register line in my programs, that does
nothing, just register.
maybe something like this?
class MyWTE is WTE {
method input (...) {...}
method
Hi,
$wte = new WTE;
$wte.register('input', my_input_widget);
I don't prefer it, to be 20-30 register line in my programs, that does
nothing, just register.
maybe something like this?
class MyWTE is WTE {
method input (...) {...}
method some_other_thing_you_would_have_had_to_register
Hi,
BRTHZI Andrs wrote:
$wte = new WTE;
$wte.register('input', my_input_widget);
I don't prefer it, to be 20-30 register line in my programs, that
does nothing, just register.
maybe something like this?
class MyWTE is WTE {
method input (...) {...}
method
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 07:19:09 -0700, Mark A. Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luke Palmer wrote:
On 14 Jun 2005 06:07:10 -, David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
multi sub infix_circumfix_meta_operator:{'',''} (Hash %a,Hash %b,Code
$op) {
my Hash %return;
Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
# No problem:
my $data = BEGIN {
my $fh = open some_file err...;
=$fh;
};
# Problem;
my $fh = BEGIN { open some_file err... };
# Compile-time filehandle leaked into runtime!
say =$fh;
[...]
* There's a boolean property
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 6/14/05, Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Following a conversation with Chip on IRC, is this
my @y := @foo[0..][1];
legal?
Definitely not. But it sure would be nice if this:
my @y := @foo[0...][1];
were.
I think that's what I
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 04:25:17PM +0200, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:43:42PM +0200, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
: The syntax might just be:
:
: is_equal:(Integer $a, Integer where { $_ == $a } :)
:
:
: It's a new type object every time, so every time you run that
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you consider arrays to be hashes keyed by integers then @a ..
@b does the equiverlent of an inner join. I would suggest that if we
are going to have outer join versions then we have something like this
It does? I thought that
On 6/14/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heh, that classification was a fast guess about RFCs made more than
4 years ago. I'm amazed it's stood up as well as it has, even where
it hasn't.
I agree, and lacking anything I could find more recent, initially
thought it was the right way to
Hi,
Thomas Klausner wrote:
my $string=a b c ~ 1 2 3;
say $string;
# prints a1 b2 c3
But where do the spaces in the second example come from?
the spaces come from the stringification of lists/arrays:
my @array = a b c d;
say [EMAIL PROTECTED];# a b c d
You can use
say
It seems to me like the time Devel::Cover takes to do its book-keeping
when a process terminates is linear in the total number of files in the
cover_db, rather than linear in the number of files involved in that
particular process.
This means that as your code base grows, the time to run unit
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Andy Dougherty wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:57:09PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Yes. The compiler does the right thing. It sensibly reports
that sizeof(PMC) = 24 for SPARC.
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #36286]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36286
My system couldn't handle an optimized compile of ops/core_ops_switch.c.
A little more interesting information. I ran a coverage test for the
full code base. Then I did this:
[kevin]% time perl -MDevel::Cover -e 1
...
perl -MDevel::Cover -e 1 14.19s user 0.88s system 79% cpu 18.997 total
Again, perhaps there is something about Devel::Cover or about Perl that
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:31:58PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: You can use
: say [~] @array; # abcd or
: say @array.join();# abcd or
: say join , @array;# abcd
: if you want to supress the spaces.
I think a bare @array.join should also work.
Larry
Larry Wall skribis 2005-06-14 14:15 (-0700):
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:31:58PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: You can use
: say [~] @array; # abcd or
: say @array.join();# abcd or
: say join , @array;# abcd
: if you want to supress the spaces.
I think a bare
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 12:55:37PM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
: David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: If you consider arrays to be hashes keyed by integers then @a ..
: @b does the equiverlent of an inner join. I would suggest that if we
: are going to have
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 11:33:21PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: You suggested cat as a join assuming '' in an old thread. I still like
: that idea.
:
: [ 'a' .. 'e' ].join # a b c d e
: [ 'a' .. 'e' ].cat# abcde
I had forgotten that. Yes, there is a little something to be
said for
Larry Wall skribis 2005-06-14 14:54 (-0700):
: [ 'a' .. 'e' ].join # a b c d e
: [ 'a' .. 'e' ].cat# abcde
I had forgotten that. Yes, there is a little something to be
said for preserving the (mostly false) symmetry of split and join.
I think I argued for .cat on the basis that
At 12:01 AM +0200 6/15/05, Juerd wrote:
Larry Wall skribis 2005-06-14 14:54 (-0700):
: [ 'a' .. 'e' ].join # a b c d e
: [ 'a' .. 'e' ].cat# abcde
I had forgotten that. Yes, there is a little something to be
said for preserving the (mostly false) symmetry of split and join.
Darren Duncan skribis 2005-06-14 15:12 (-0700):
And the space character is really a rather arbitrary looking value
for a default and is equally valid with, say, the line break, so how
can one say it is better?
Array stringification uses it too, by default. The lesser the number of
defaults,
On 6/14/05, Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.sub __add
.param MyType $P0 :flags(0x40) # or @flags(0x40)? - inv. w/o colon
(e.g.)
.param $I0 :flags(0x20) # invocant with colon (e.g.)
...
What do you think?
I think the typecodes are unnecessary with a
Juerd wrote:
Still, argumentless split probably defaults to something. And ' ' is a
good thing to default to, IMO.
I like /\s+/ as a default for split better.
-- Rod Adams
From: Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:06 +0200
Bob Rogers wrote:
. . .
To ignore a parameter, simply don't fetch it. To ignore a return,
simply don't supply a register for it.
Yep - that's still doable, but not in the middle, which
49 matches
Mail list logo
