Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Ralph Mellor
> Ralph Mellor wrote: > >> > @r = @r , 'd'; > >> > >> There isn't anything very useful in this behavior though, is there? > > Just to be clear, I wasn't saying I didn't think circular references > should be forbidden, I just specifically meant that you weren't likely > to want the ",=" operator

Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Ralph Mellor
> Zen slicing as a possible way of 'de-containerizing' : > https://docs.raku.org/language/subscripts#index-entry-Zen_slices A zen-slice only affects the single reference it's applied to. And it is a no op when applied to anything other than a `Scalar`. So it'll have no effect when applied

Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread William Michels via perl6-users
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 9:16 AM Joseph Brenner wrote: > > William Michels wrote: > >> > "Perhaps more importantly, what improvement do you propose?" > > > > Apologies for top-posting, but what immediately comes to my mind upon > > encountering the creation of a self-referential

Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Joseph Brenner
William Michels wrote: >> > "Perhaps more importantly, what improvement do you propose?" > > Apologies for top-posting, but what immediately comes to my mind upon > encountering the creation of a self-referential (circular/infinite) > object is proverbially 'going-down-a-level' and trying again.

Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Joseph Brenner
Joseph Brenner wrote: > Just to be clear, I wasn't saying I didn't think circular references should be forbidden, Sorry about the double-negative. It could use another "not" to triple it.

Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Joseph Brenner
Ralph Mellor wrote: >> > @r = @r , 'd'; >> >> Okay, that makes sense. So the circular reference I thought I >> was seeing is really there, and it's working as designed. >> >> There isn't anything very useful in this behavior though, is there? > > Yes. > > Here are some relevant results from a

Re: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Parrot Raiser
P.S. My apologies for top-posting in the quoted text, and my apologies to William for the duplication. On 11/29/20, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Having a consistent ("regular", in the linguistic sense), structure > for something like the op= form is obviously very desirable. It's

Fwd: The ,= operator

2020-11-29 Thread Parrot Raiser
Having a consistent ("regular", in the linguistic sense), structure for something like the op= form is obviously very desirable. It's so much easier to teach and learn a rule like "op= has the same effect, whatever "op" is; it takes the variable on the LHS, applies the operator to its contents and