HaloO,
Mark J. Reed wrote:
It would behoove @Larry to examine the optional type constraints
system proposed for Javascript:TNG (see link from firefox.com
developers page). I therefore assume that they have done so, but
others would benefit by doing likewise. :)
Do I get that right: you imply
I know how comparisons are chained in Perl 6. There is a very short section on
it in S03.
So, are the operators infix:{''} etc. written in the normal way to take two
arguments? Then the language transforms A op B op C into A op B AND B op C on
an innate level. Does that apply to any
Thom Boyer thom-at-boyers.org |Perl 6| wrote:
Mark J. Reed wrote:
It would behoove @Larry to examine the optional type constraints
system proposed for Javascript:TNG (see link from firefox.com
developers page). I therefore assume that they have done so, but
others would benefit by doing
How do you declare a function that returns an array? Something like
sub foo (blah) is Array of X { ... }
seems right, but it has two problems. First is a real problem, and is a
mistake seen a lot in C# and the .NET framework. A concrete type is
used when it should be an interface. What
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 12:10:54AM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Am Freitag, 11. April 2008 21:02 schrieb Nuno 'smash' Carvalho:
Greetings all,
I just posted a little Parrot benchmark in my use.perl's journal
Just a reminder:
Please don't use unoptimzed builds for benchmarking.
I
Hi All,
I started the What can I do with Perl 6 today wiki page at the start
of the year, but have been too busy with $paid_work to put much time
into it since.
I was hoping anybody who's written perl 6 code and run it with Rakudo
or pugs could help fill in the gaps - there are a list of
On 16/04/2008, Aaron Trevena [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I started the What can I do with Perl 6 today wiki page at the start
of the year...
That would be at
http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?what_can_i_do_with_perl_6_today
A.
--
http://www.aarontrevena.co.uk
LAMP System
TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote:
I found two dissertations and a couple of papers about typing
JavaScript. The quintessential is that optional typing is
defined as having *no* impact on the dynamic behavior of the
program. In that respect type annotations are like comments.
I
Tim Bunce wrote:
I'd suggest a simpler approach than Geoffrey's: The default 'make'
target could default to a reasonably safe portable optimized target, but
be overridable by an env var.
[snip]
Developers working on parrot (wanting unoptimized/debug quick builds)
would just need to set an env
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
How do you declare a function that returns an array? Something like
sub foo (blah) is Array of X { ... }
The 'is' there is your invention, isn't it? The synopsis
require 'of' or 'returns' depending if you want to specify
the outer and/or inner type. The 'is'
On Apr 16, 2008, at 3:49 , John M. Dlugosz wrote:
Or, are the operators written in a tricky way, to return an object
that encapsulates the original right argument and the proper
boolean result, and has forms to take this object as well? IOW, no
built-in support.
Yes, they use
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
I seem to recall seeing sigils in a signature without names,
but now I can't remember where.
E.g. in S06 und section The want function.
Regards, TSa.
--
The unavoidable price of reliability is simplicity
-- C.A.R. Hoare
On Apr 16, 2008, at 3:44 , TSa wrote:
I found two dissertations and a couple of papers about typing
JavaScript. The quintessential is that optional typing is
defined as having *no* impact on the dynamic behavior of the
program. In that respect type annotations are like comments.
I doubt that
Type checking in both js2/ecma4 and p6 is not merely documentation.
It is enforced, but only if present. This is a tricky thing to
achieve, which is why I suggested reading the js stuff to see how they
went about it.
On 4/16/08, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 16,
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
# Please include the string: [perl #52956]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52956
While trying to put the macport for 0.6.1 together, I noticed that the
install
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 09:47 +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
I agree with Geoffrey that optimized builds should be the default.
Thank you!
Developers working on parrot (wanting unoptimized/debug quick builds)
would just need to set an env var in their .profile, for example, and
carry on as now. No
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
Then [X]() also is ()? How about (0,1) X ([]) === (0,1)?
No, that's (0,[]), (1,[1]). [] *doesn't* flatten in list context.
I guess you meant (0,[]), (1,[]). And you didn't answer what
[X]() returns. Following your arguments this would be undef.
I am genuinely
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:29:23PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: You should look at Common Lisp. it's definition of optional typing is that
if you take a correct program and remove all the type declarations, then it
still works correctly, although it may be significantly less efficient.
On Sunday 06 April 2008 16:05:45 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Modified:
trunk/languages/perl6/src/builtins/guts.pir
trunk/languages/perl6/src/parser/actions.pm
trunk/languages/perl6/src/parser/grammar.pg
Log:
[rakudo] Add type-checking of parameters to subroutines and methods.
This
chromatic wrote:
On Sunday 06 April 2008 16:05:45 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Modified:
trunk/languages/perl6/src/builtins/guts.pir
trunk/languages/perl6/src/parser/actions.pm
trunk/languages/perl6/src/parser/grammar.pg
Log:
[rakudo] Add type-checking of parameters to subroutines and
2008/4/15 jerry gay [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Aloha!
On behalf of the Parrot team, I'm proud to announce Parrot 0.6.1
Bird of Paradise. Parrot (http://parrotcode.org/) is a virtual machine
aimed
at running all dynamic languages.
The Windows setup is available on
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 11:22:08 Jonathan Worthington wrote:
This is the commit which broke the Rock, Paper, Scissors MMD example.
*confused look* But I didn't implement the stuff needed to run the rock,
paper scissors MMD example until 4 days after the commit you mention?
chromatic wrote:
You're right. I started from the wrong point in my bisect.
No worries.
I can't reproduce the problem with any revision before or after the 0.6.1
release.
But the 0.6.1 release had a problem? If I'm understanding correctly, the
current revision doesn't show the
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 09:38:41PM +0200, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
chromatic wrote:
You're right. I started from the wrong point in my bisect.
No worries.
I can't reproduce the problem with any revision before or after the 0.6.1
release.
But the 0.6.1 release had a problem? If
one consistent trouble spot in the parrot release process is the CPAN
upload process. often times, we have trouble with perl modules that
have been added, deleted, or renamed causing the release to be marked
as 'unauthorized'. dealing with unauthorized releases involves
intervention from a pause
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:45:22 -0700
jerry gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also, i'd like to automate more of the release process. currently, we
have a period of time where the link on the website for the most
recent parrot will point to the previous release of parrot, until the
new distro
From: Patrick R. Michaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:47:13 -0500
Also, something that might help with the discussion of multimethod
dispatch in rock-paper-scissors is to note that the mmd types do
not have to be directly related in the type hierarchy. In other
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Mark Glines [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:45:22 -0700
jerry gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also, i'd like to automate more of the release process. currently, we
have a period of time where the link on the website for the most
recent
# New Ticket Created by Christoph Otto (Volt)
# Please include the string: [perl #52976]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52976
The perl6 stand-alone binary chokes on chromatic's mmd example
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 10:49:15 Christoph Otto (Volt) wrote:
The perl6 stand-alone binary chokes on chromatic's mmd example
(http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2008/04/multiple_dispatch_now_please
.html) under linux/x86. The bug was exposed in r26173, but the root cause
is probably
Confirmed. This bug is still there as of r27009
Nikolay Ananiev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'll be able to test Parrot in the next 48 hours
on my pentium mmx and tell you what the result is.
- Original Message -
From: James Keenan via RT [EMAIL
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
There's currently a problem in that
class Foo { }
doesn't create 'Foo' as a subclass of Object.
Hmmmthat's odd, since I can do:
class Foo { }
if Foo ~~ Object { say yes }
yes
if Foo.new() ~~ Object { say yes }
yes
I know that it doesn't explicitly do
chromatic wrote:
It helps the PIR Ackerman benchmark by 4.67%. parrot_pass_args gets more
expensive, but next_arg_sig and everything else except for
Parrot_init_arg_indexes_and_sig_pmc gets called much, much less. I played
with the patch a little bit, but didn't get it much faster.
So is
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
Examination of this file suggests that its length is simply a function
of the fact that PIR and PASM are mostly written with very short lines.
There is no compelling reason to try to subdivide the file. Closing
ticket.
TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote:
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
How do you declare a function that returns an array? Something like
sub foo (blah) is Array of X { ... }
I meant of, not is.
In general the of keyword instanciates parametric types just like
the direct
TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote:
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
I seem to recall seeing sigils in a signature without names,
but now I can't remember where.
E.g. in S06 und section The want function.
Regards, TSa.
Somewhere else, I think it discussed unnamed parameters to
Patrick R. Michaud pmichaud-at-pobox.com |Perl 6| wrote:
It applies to any operator that has 'chain' associativity --
see S06, Subroutine traits.
If I want to make my own chained operator, perhaps the
curvy #8828;, #8829;, etc. or make my operator #8807;
a synonym for =, how would I tell
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 09:39:52AM -0400, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On Apr 16, 2008, at 3:49 , John M. Dlugosz wrote:
Or, are the operators written in a tricky way, to return an object that
encapsulates the original right argument and the proper boolean result,
and has forms to take
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On Apr 16, 2008, at 3:49 , John M. Dlugosz wrote:
Or, are the operators written in a tricky way, to return an object
that encapsulates the original right argument and the proper boolean
result, and has forms to take this object as well? IOW, no built-in
From: Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:39:52 -0400
. . .
Yes, they use multiple-typed values such that (3 5) returns (5 but
True), which used in a numeric context is a 5 that can be chained
with further infix:{''}s but in a boolean
Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote:
Well, that's more or less how Icon does it, but we're not going to expose
anything like that to the user. If we assume that comparisons take two
immutable objects, we can leave it to the compiler to compute the actual
value once, and then feed it to
First, consider the stated examples for Generic type parameters, from the
passage which defines the terminology in S02:
sub max (Num ::X @array) {
push @array, X.new();
}
sub compare (Any ::T $x, T $y) {
return $x eqv $y;
}
Is this code syntactically and conceptually correct?
method postfix:++ (--::?CLASS)
is export
{
my ::?CLASS $temp = self;
self =. successor;
return $temp;
}
method prefix:++ (--::?CLASS)
is export
is rw
{
self =.successor;
return self;
}
In particular, are pre/postfix
56 matches
Mail list logo
