Actually, if you change it to .*| -- this will work as you
expect. It's a bug that your version doesn't work, of course. It does
seem to involve tangentially, but it is unrelated to underscore.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 6:17 PM Vijayvithal via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:
> This
Actually, if you change it to .*| -- this will work as you
expect. It's a bug that your version doesn't work, of course. It does
seem to involve tangentially, but it is unrelated to underscore.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 6:17 PM Vijayvithal via RT <
perl6-bugs-follo...@perl.org> wrote:
> This
This issue surfaces because of the token TOP line. If instead of
| only ruport was used the testcase works for both cases. So it
is quite
possible that the bug is elsewhere but shows up as a difference between
alpha and alnum.
Regards
Vijay
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 07:18:49AM -0700, Patrick R.
This is in conflict with the documentation at
https://docs.perl6.org/language/regexes which states
Alphabetic characters including _
And
\w. plus
In my example.
'_' matches the alpha regex.
As per specifications, Everything that matches alpha should match alnum.
Which in the given
toddandma...@zoho.com (ToddAndMargo) writes:
>
> Hi Curt,
>
> Perfect! Thank you!
>
> So all methods that respond with --> Positional will accept []
>
> Awesome!
>
> -T
Not quite.
All methods that respond with --> Positional, provide a Positional that
will accept []
Methods don't accept [],
This is in conflict with the documentation at
https://docs.perl6.org/language/regexes which states
Alphabetic characters including _
And
\w. plus
In my example.
'_' matches the alpha regex.
As per specifications, Everything that matches alpha should match alnum.
Which in the given
This issue surfaces because of the token TOP line. If instead of
| only ruport was used the testcase works for both cases. So it
is quite
possible that the bug is elsewhere but shows up as a difference between
alpha and alnum.
Regards
Vijay
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 07:18:49AM -0700, Patrick R.
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 04:02:15AM -0700, ToddAndMargo wrote:
: Hi All,
:
: https://docs.perl6.org/routine/join#(List)_routine_join
:
: method join(List:D: $separator --> Str:D)
:
: $ p6 'say (1, ).join("|");'
: 1|a b c
:
:
: It states in the manual that this will happen.
:
: Questions:
:
:
That just sounds like the backing store got restored from backup, losing
anything added after the backup was taken. Which is not the best way to do
things (incrementals are nice), but if things had gone wrong enough might
have been the best they could do.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 7:13 PM
On 9/30/18 3:58 AM, JJ Merelo wrote:
There is one line per signature, or definition.
You misunderstand. I was proposing a different
way of stating it such that you did not have to
keep repeating lines with slight differences
On 9/30/18 9:11 PM, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
your 'perl' box was corrupted.
Somewhere the imap daemons got appeased and suddenly a day later,
I watched it all come blazing back.
Hopefully tomorrow I will get a chance to read over what yo wrote.
By the way, the eMail I send about the thread
`Foo::Bar::<$quux>` is basically short for `::Foo::Bar::('$quux')` (except
the former is looked up at compile time)
So the way to do this is:
my $bar = 'Bar';
::Foo::( $bar ~ '::$quux' )
or
::Foo::($bar)::('$quux')
Note that the leading `::` are necessary for dynamic lookups.
El lun., 1 oct. 2018 a las 13:47, Richard Hogaboom (<
richard.hogab...@gmail.com>) escribió:
> Hmm... the ($bar) in Foo::($bar)::<$quux>; is an interpolation, but the
> <$quux> is just another way of writing $Foo::($bar)::quux;, not an
> interpolation, no?
>
> Right. It kinda is, but it should
Hmm... the ($bar) in Foo::($bar)::<$quux>; is an interpolation, but the
<$quux> is just another way of writing $Foo::($bar)::quux;, not an
interpolation, no?
On 10/1/18 7:41 AM, JJ Merelo wrote:
Thanks. I'll fix that.
WRT the original post, it looks like it should work, but apparently
Thanks. I'll fix that.
WRT the original post, it looks like it should work, but apparently can't.
The error should be selfexplanatory. Either you interpolate using :: or <>,
but not both...
JJ
El lun., 1 oct. 2018 a las 13:38, Richard Hogaboom (<
richard.hogab...@gmail.com>) escribió:
> Not
Not exactly, but close. The following line is exactly from the doc. It
works. It it works, then the offending(next line) line should work as well.
my$bar='Bar';
say$Foo::($bar)::quux;
# compound identifiers with interpolations; OUTPUT: «42»
sayFoo::($bar)::<$quux>; # won't compile -
You can read the thread here:
https://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.users/2018/09/msg5757.html
On 2018-10-01 04:21:43 +0330, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> My "Perl" box got corrupted and in the process of rebuilding
> it I lost this thread except for one one message from JJ.
> Anyway,
Thank you for the clarification!
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018, 05:54 Brad Gilbert wrote:
> The [+] works because of an optimization.
>
> If you use the core :<+> it instead calls the .sum() method.
>
> Since CArray has a sum method, that gets called instead.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 4:28 AM Fernando
18 matches
Mail list logo
