On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:31:24 -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Meaning that the list:
+^- force to numeric context, complement
~^- force to string context, complement
simply becomes:
^ - complement (type-specific)
Does this include booleans? I really liked the idea
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 06:51 AM, Peter Haworth wrote:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:31:24 -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Meaning that the list:
+^- force to numeric context, complement
~^- force to string context, complement
simply becomes:
^ - complement (type-specific)
Peter Haworth wrote:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:31:24 -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Meaning that the list:
+^- force to numeric context, complement
~^- force to string context, complement
simply becomes:
^ - complement (type-specific)
Does this include booleans? I really
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
Larry mused:
Of course, Real Mathematicians will want [1..10) and (1..10] instead.
Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary.
Does it buy us enough over +1 and -1?
And for what it's worth, Real Mathematicians do not use open intervals for
On (02/11/02 11:18), Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat wrote:
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 11:18:22 +0100 (CET)
From: Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
Larry mused
Luke Palmer writes:
All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
confuse op with $File_Handle?
sub postfix:bar returns handle;
$y = undef bar;
That has two syntactically valid interpretations. It wouldn't take
even that much to confuse the parser, though.
On 2002-11-01 at 16:03:51, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
I'm not too concerned about unicode since my xterm doesn't support it
anyway =)
XFree86 4.2.0 xterm does UTF-8 (when requested to do so via the -u8 flag).
If course, you need a Uniciode/ISO-10646 X11 font, but there are plenty of
those
--
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 15:08:06
Brent Dax wrote:
Erik Steven Harrison:
# All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
# confuse op with $File_Handle?
If you assume infinite lookahead, it's fine, but if not...
something ...
Is that a call to
sub something()
From: Larry Wall [mailto:larry;wall.org]
I was misconfigured here. My pine was marking it as UTF-8 even though
the window was Latin-1. So you ought to be able to see this:
@a «*» @b.
I'm definitely going to look into mutt though...gotta have
Unicode email.
In the quest for keys anyone
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 09:39:28AM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
In the quest for keys anyone can reach on any keyboard...
instead of «*» why not: (*), )*(, )*(, [*], or [)*(]
Which stands out best?
a «*» b
a (*) b
a )*( b
a )*( b
a [*] b
a [)*(] b
IMHO [*]
That might
Garrett Goebel said:
Which stands out best?
a «*» b
a (*) b
a )*( b
a )*( b
a [*] b
a [)*(] b
IMHO [*]
I say go with the one with the cutest name.
Garrett's choice is the bow-tie operator--not bad.
This one: (*) is also a pretty good bow-tie.
This one: )*( would be the
On 2002-10-30 at 12:47:17, Larry Wall wrote:
(Anybody know of a version of pine that does UTF-8?)
Yes - it's called mutt. ☺
Seriously, I do highly recommend switching from pine to mutt. It's not
a completely painless transition, since mutt is more ELMlike than PINElike,
but I know many who have
-Original Message-
From: Austin Hastings [mailto:austin_hastings;yahoo.com]
How do you write a in a Windows based environment? (Other than by
copying them from Larry's emails or loading MSWord to do
insert-symbol)
You could use the Character Map accessory to put
the character
* Dyck, David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [31 Oct 2002 19:21]:
[...]
You could use the Character Map accessory to put
the character into the clipboard, or
press the alt and hold the alt key while typing 0171 (or 0187)
alt+0171
alt+0187
To be honest, as easy as it is to type ^a^v or ^k,[1] it's
--- Dyck, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Austin Hastings [mailto:austin_hastings;yahoo.com]
How do you write a in a Windows based environment? (Other than by
copying them from Larry's emails or loading MSWord to do
insert-symbol)
You could use
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:52 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Applications/Utilities/Key Caps (Again, OSX) which shows you where
they all are.
The «» quotes, for example, are option-\ and shift-option-\
Oh, well, I guess those aren't *too* far out of the way...
David
--
David Wheeler
On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 04:02, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
* Dyck, David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [31 Oct 2002 19:21]:
[...]
You could use the Character Map accessory to put
the character into the clipboard, or
press the alt and hold the alt key while typing 0171 (or 0187)
alt+0171
On 31 Oct 2002, brian wheeler wrote:
: I agree considering, this isn't APL and the problems people have had
: mailing examples (let alone creating them!).
Nevertheless, it has already been decreed that Perl 6 programs are
written in Unicode. That's not gonna change...
: I've got to admit all of
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
: To be honest, as easy as it is to type ^a^v or ^k,[1] it's still
Thanks, I didn't know it was that «easy» in vim. :-)
: typing an awful lot just to get a character. Surely the Perl operator
: Huffman encoding should take into account the
Larry Wall:
# Perl 6 is written in Unicode.
Great. That's a wonderful policy. But it *shouldn't influence routine
coding in any way*. I have no problem with user-defined Unicode
operators. I have a *huge* problem with built-in Unicode operators, and
a gargantuan problem with built-in Unicode
--
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:26:13
Brent Dax wrote:
I can honestly say at this point that I'd rather give up $iterator
than lose hyperops.
I was thinking the same thing not long ago. But now
that I think about it, is operator ever going to be
confused for $File_Handle? The vector operation
Erik Steven Harrison writes:
All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
confuse op with $File_Handle?
it seems that parser cannot confuse them because op is operator and
parser expect operator, while $File_Handle is a term .
but human can confuse .
I personally also like
Erik Steven Harrison:
# All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
# confuse op with $File_Handle?
If you assume infinite lookahead, it's fine, but if not...
something ...
Is that a call to
sub something() returns(IO::Handle)
or a hypered
sub
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:45:16 -0800
From: Erik Steven Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Sent-Mail: off
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Sender-Ip: 152.18.50.63
Organization: Angelfire
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Erik Steven Harrison writes:
:
:
: All that said, can anyone come up with a case to
: confuse op with $File_Handle?
:
:
:
: it seems that parser cannot confuse them because op is operator and
: parser expect operator, while
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
If no one saw them then it could well be a problem on my end.
I'm trying to use a mailer (pine) that doesn't know about UTF-8 in
a «+» b
I'm using Pine 4.33 on FreeBSD 4.3, and I see these fine.
--Dks
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Dave Storrs wrote:
: On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: If no one saw them then it could well be a problem on my end.
: I'm trying to use a mailer (pine) that doesn't know about UTF-8 in
:
: a «+» b
:
: I'm using Pine 4.33 on FreeBSD 4.3, and I see
* Larry Wall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [31 Oct 2002 08:22]:
[...]
This is currently running in a window that does Latin-1 rather than
UTF-8. Do these French quotes come through?
@a «+» @b
The window may say Latin-1, but the mail header said UTF-8.
As it happens, I couldn't see them until I
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
: This is currently running in a window that does Latin-1 rather than
: UTF-8. Do these French quotes come through?
:
: a «+» b
:
: The window may say Latin-1, but the mail header said UTF-8.
:
: As it happens, I couldn't see them until I
* Larry Wall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [01 Nov 2002 15:59]:
[...]
I was misconfigured here. My pine was marking it as UTF-8 even though
the window was Latin-1. So you ought to be able to see this: @a «*» @b.
That appeared perfectly.
I'm definitely going to look into mutt though...gotta have
On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 12:15, Larry Wall wrote:
On 31 Oct 2002, brian wheeler wrote:
: I agree considering, this isn't APL and the problems people have had
: mailing examples (let alone creating them!).
Nevertheless, it has already been decreed that Perl 6 programs are
written in Unicode.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
unary (prefix) operators:
\ - reference to
* - list flattening
? - force to bool context
! - force to bool context, negate
not - force to bool context, negate
+ - force to numeric
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
Still thinking about ..! or ..^ or some such. Could have ^..^ and ^..
too, for all that.
We could indeed have a whole range of Japanese smiley operators.
--
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
LW said:
:...- readline
Iterate interator.
Couldn't we go the python way and assume that .. is implicit in
for statments:
$fh = open(..);
for $fh { # instead of for $fh
print $_;
}
For explicit iteration, we could well do just with a .next method:
while
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Mark J. Reed wrote:
: Larry's mail was *marked* as UTF-8, but by the time I got it it
: had no French quotes in it in UTF-8, Latin-1, or any other encoding anymore.
: My mailer understand UTF-8 just fine, and so does vim (which I used to
: look at my spool file to check for
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote:
If we are going to do math with ranges, we definitely need non-
discreet ranges also. Or at least make sure it's easy enough to
implement as a class.
(1.9 .. 2.1) + (5..7) * (72.49 .. 72.51);
I don't think that non-discrete
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do these French quotes come through?
@a «+» @b
Oui, M'sieu!
__
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:47 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
This is currently running in a window that does Latin-1 rather than
UTF-8.
Do these French quotes come through?
@a ´+ª @b
Nope.
But given that I don't even know where to go to type them in, and doing
so will likely be a
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do these French quotes come through?
@a «+» @b
Odd, I see them in this message. But In the message from Larry I see ?'s
Graham.
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:28 PM, David Wheeler wrote:
But given that I don't even know where to go to type them in, and
doing so will likely be a PITA...even though I *love* the idea of
using these characters, might it be better to abandon them for now?
Oh, don't say that! I
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:35 PM, Graham Barr wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do these French quotes come through?
@a «+» @b
Odd, I see them in this message. But In the message from Larry I see
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:43 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Oh, don't say that! I already know what all of these should mean! :-)
≈ … ∫ § ¿ ∆ ∑ Ω ø ¶ º ≠ ≤ ≥ ‹ › ‡ Ø ˇ ¬ Ç Œ ∞ ¡ •
Nice, I can see all of those. Your mailer is the same as mine, Apple
Mail, and the headers are:
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:46 PM, David Wheeler wrote:
But let me ask you -- how did you input those characters?
Applications/Utilities/Key Caps (Again, OSX) which shows you where
they all are.
The «» quotes, for example, are option-\ and shift-option-\
:-)
MikeL
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 11:39:26PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So maybe the correct interpretation of the above is indeed this:
(1..10)-1 # (1..10).length-1, e.g. 9 (oops!)
Do range objects return their length in scalar context?
(1..10) [-] 1 # (0..9) (correct, if that's WYM)
Maybe we've gone over this before but, if so, I don't remember ...
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
hyperoperators:
[op] - as prefix to any unary/binary operator, vectorizes the
operator
. - method call on current topic
What would [.]method()
--- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we've gone over this before but, if so, I don't remember ...
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
hyperoperators:
[op] - as prefix to any unary/binary operator, vectorizes the
operator
.
When I'm trying to figure out what the default hypering semantics for
an operator would be, I use this:
***BEGIN CODE***
{
use strict;
use warnings;
sub _is_arrayref { ref $_[0] ref $_[0] eq 'ARRAY' }
sub hyper(\@\@) {
my($code, $a, $b)=@_;
my @results;
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:13:02AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we've gone over this before but, if so, I don't remember ...
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
hyperoperators:
[op] - as
[.]foo() # What does this mean?
One could argue that several ways, depending on what's in the current
topic. It's the exact same thing as the binary form of dot, but with
the left side being implied, as 'the current topic':
topic is a scalar: hyperdot does nothing (scalar hyperop
--- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:13:02AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe we've gone over this before but, if so, I don't remember
...
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0800, Michael
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote:
: No, no. I'm talking about the unary . prefix
:
: method blah {
: .foo()
: [.]foo() # What does this mean?
: }
:
: Vector of invocations of the foo methods of the current topic.
Except that the topic is by
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 11:58 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
I'd even be willing to give up ´foo bar bazª meaning qw(foo bar baz)
for this.
I can't see that right (MacOSX Jaguar) in the email; to me it looks
like a forwardtick and an, um, underlined 'a' -- but in spite of that,
I'm game.
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:17 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
I can't see that right (MacOSX Jaguar) in the email; to me it looks
like a forwardtick and an, um, underlined 'a' -- but in spite of that,
I'm game. It's just so pretty (when it works!)
On my Mac, it's spelled «op» -- can
On 2002-10-30 at 12:23:53, David Wheeler wrote:
This tells me that Mail.app, for some reason, didn't know that it was
supposed to use UTF-8 when showing Larry's mail. When I pasted his mail
into a UTF-8 document in Emacs, it looked fine.
Given that it's probably UTF-8 that Perl 6 source
On 30/10/02 15:33 -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2002-10-30 at 12:23:53, David Wheeler wrote:
This tells me that Mail.app, for some reason, didn't know that it was
supposed to use UTF-8 when showing Larry's mail. When I pasted his mail
into a UTF-8 document in Emacs, it looked fine.
On 29 Oct 2002 at 22:29, Larry Wall wrote:
Of course, Real Mathematicians will want [1..10) and (1..10] instead.
That seems familiar, I like it ;)
There's also an issue of what (1..10) - 1 would or should mean, if
anything. Does it mean (1..9)? Does 1 + (1..10) mean (2..10)?
And what
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 03:33:57PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2002-10-30 at 12:23:53, David Wheeler wrote:
This tells me that Mail.app, for some reason, didn't know that it was
supposed to use UTF-8 when showing Larry's mail. When I pasted his mail
into a UTF-8 document in Emacs, it
On 30 Oct 2002 at 15:24, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote:
If we are going to do math with ranges, we definitely need non-
discreet ranges also. Or at least make sure it's easy enough to
implement as a class.
(1.9 .. 2.1) + (5..7)
Larry mused:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Whipp wrote:
: Larry Wall [mailto:larry;wall.org] wrote:
: : unary (postfix) operators:
: :... - [maybe] same as ..Inf [Damian votes Yes]
: : I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
: endpoints by saying something like
Graham Barr wrote:
Now that we have gained ^ back from being a hyeroperator, could we not
have ^ as a polymorphic complement operator. It can always be combined
with ~ or + to force context, eg
$a = ^ +$b;
$a = ^ ~$b;
We would then have a complement operator that I would assume objects
Larry Wall:
# This is currently running in a window that does Latin-1
# rather than UTF-8. Do these French quotes come through?
#
# @a + @b
No, but I'm running Outlook, so it's probably a bug on my end. :^) (It
does show up in that annoying variable-width font it switches to for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damian Conway) writes:
Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary.
If you're going for user-definable operators, most of this syntax is
entirely unnecessary. Take all the hairy stuff out of core and be done
with it!
This won't stop people arguing about it, though. :)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
â
 â
¦Â â
«Â § ¿ â
 â
 Ω ø ¶ º â
 â
¤Â â
¥Â â
¹Â â
ºÂ â
¡Â Ã
 Ë
 ¬ Ã
 Å
 â
 ¡ â
¢
How does that translate to Perl 5?
--
Almost any animal is capable learning a
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 03:07 PM, Damian Conway wrote:
In creating my operator list I deliberated shied away from the unary
and binary
multimorphic forms. But I do see Graham's point and would favour
retaining
polymorphic unary C^ at least.
Meaning that the list:
+ - force
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Meaning that the list:
+ - force to numeric context
- - force to numeric context, negate
+^- force to numeric context, complement
~ - force to string context
~^- force to string context, complement
simply becomes:
^ - complement
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
: Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary.
: Does it buy us enough over +1 and -1?
Well, that was my first thought, but...
: Proposed Now
:
:1..101..10
: 1..^10 1..9
:
Larry elucidated:
In general, for any type, how do you write
[$min .. $max - $step : $step]
when you don't even necessarily have subtraction defined? We don't know
how to do z - 1 in Perl 5, for instance.
Okay. I buy that.
Damian
On 30/10/02 13:41 -0800, David Wheeler wrote:
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:35 PM, Graham Barr wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do these French quotes come through?
@a «+» @b
Odd, I see
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
:(is whitespace allowed inside the brackets, e.g. [ + ] vs. [+] ?)
I don't think so.
: unary (prefix) operators:
:. - method call on current topic
I think we have to have unary .= as well, if we're to do the
.=replace
trick on $_.
:
Larry Wall [mailto:larry;wall.org] wrote:
: unary (postfix) operators:
:... - [maybe] same as ..Inf [Damian votes Yes]
I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
endpoints by saying something like 1..!10.
Perhaps we could use the less-than symbol: 1 .. 10
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Whipp wrote:
: Larry Wall [mailto:larry;wall.org] wrote:
: : unary (postfix) operators:
: :... - [maybe] same as ..Inf [Damian votes Yes]
:
: I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
: endpoints by saying something like 1..!10.
:
:
Larry Wall wrote:
:... - [maybe] range, exclusive of endpoint [Damian votes No]
Could have ^..^ and ^..too, for all that.
OK, I just gotta say, that's _d*mn_ clever. Exclusive of endpoint --
It looks like what it is, and vice versa. I guess that's why you're our
fearless leader. :-)
: I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
: endpoints by saying something like 1..!10.
:
: Similarly: 1 .. 10 == 2..9
There's also an issue of what (1..10) - 1 would or should
mean, if anything. Does it mean (1..9)? Does 1 + (1..10)
mean (2..10)?
And what
Larry Wall:
# Of course, Real Mathematicians will want [1..10) and (1..10] instead.
#
# Double ick.
Reminds me of the number-line notation you learn about *before*
precalculus (or whatever the value of
$you.schooling.grade[12].class{math}.name is) confuses everything, with
open vs. closed
Brent Dax wrote:
Larry Wall:
# There's also an issue of what (1..10) - 1 would or should
# mean, if anything. Does it mean (1..9)? Does 1 + (1..10)
Actually, I would at first glance think, based on the parens, that:
(1..10)-1
means
((1-1)..(10-1))
means
(0..9)
75 matches
Mail list logo
