Salzenberg wrote:
... any language using := for assignment is doomed
to obscurity.[*] It's a law of nature.
chuckle :-)
(Ah, language design. :-))
No choice will satisfy everyone. So we each say our piece, then we
happily accept whatever the designer decides. No problem.
Regards,
Roger
My view I understand the way it's currently done. I'm totally lost
at what's being proposed.
Joshua
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Roger Browne wrote:
Salzenberg wrote:
... any language using := for assignment is doomed
to obscurity.[*] It's a law of nature.
chuckle :-)
(Ah, language
On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:13:05PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Nov 29, 2005, at 21:36, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
I'm planning a flag day sometime in December. I'm also planning to
create a simple handles most cases translator.
That's
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:49:13PM -0500, Joshua Juran wrote:
On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Excellent. Now if only I knew a good language for text filters...
How about sed or awk?
Hm. If only we had a pir2xml, I could use XSLT.
--
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:04:43AM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:49:13PM -0500, Joshua Juran wrote:
: On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: Excellent. Now if only I knew a good language for text filters...
:
: How about sed or awk?
:
: Hm. If
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:41:59PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
op_leave seq=0 - DONE targ=1 flags=VOID,KIDS,PARENS
private=REFCOUNTED
refcnt=1
op_enter seq=1 - 2 /
op_null seq=0 - (2) flags=VOID
madprops
mad_sv key=p val=/
mad_sv key=_
Consider:
P0 = P1
P0 = S1
P0 = I1
P0 = N1
o/~ One of these things is not like the others
One of these things just doesn't belong o/~
And if I have to read:
P0 = new .Integer
P0 = 1
one more time... *sigh*
Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
P0 := opcode # aliasing: P0 points to PMC returned by opcode
P0 = ... # assignment: modifies P0, NO MATTER WHAT '...' IS
S0 := S1 # aliasing: S0 and S1 point to same
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:08:01PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='. This will
affect all code generated to use P and S registers. It should be an easy fix
(albeit an extensive one). And if we don't do it now, it'll just get
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And if I have to read:
P0 = new .Integer
P0 = 1
one more time... *sigh*
Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='. This will
affect all code generated to use P and S registers. It should be an easy fix
(albeit an
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
P0 := opcode # aliasing: P0 points to PMC returned by opcode
P0 = ... # assignment: modifies P0, NO
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Personally I haven't had much trouble with '=' and I don't think
I ever use ':='. Perhaps I've just trained myself to the current
implementation, but I like that the shorter '=' does what I tend
to want/expect and I write an
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:08:01PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
P0 := opcode # aliasing: P0 points to PMC returned by opcode
P0 = ... # assignment:
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
I'm not sure about the last two (in a lot of ways, they're more like
:= than = ),
I don't see that.
Well, for one thing, my way would mean that `set` is always `:=`.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:25:13PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='.
And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs and
sloths, and carp and anchovies, and orangutans and
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:36:03PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
P0 = P1[S1]# supported?
Yes, it means to fetch a PMC and make P0 an alias to it. Perl 6
equivalent should be, more or less:
$a := $array[$i];
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:36:03PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Second comment: how about access to keyed items -- does this mean:
P0 := P1[S1] # alias
S0 = P1[S1]# assignment
I0 = P1[S1]#
From: Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:27:03 -0800
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
P0 := opcode #
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:38:55PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
I'm not sure about the last two (in a lot of ways, they're more like
:= than = ),
I don't see
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
So aliasing copies the pointer (i.e. the object itself), and
assignment copies the value?
Right. Note, however, that you have to *have* a pointer for copying
the pointer to be meaningful. Thus, since I and N registers are not
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:25:13PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
Or, perhaps more accurately, `P1 := ...\n assign P0, P1`?
No, PIR doesn't do that kind of thing (allocating P registers) behind
your back. If a sequence needs a second P register, PIR
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 04:27:28PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:25:13PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
Or, perhaps more accurately, `P1 := ...\n assign P0, P1`?
No, PIR doesn't do that kind of thing (allocating P
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:13:05PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Nov 29, 2005, at 21:36, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
I'm planning a flag day sometime in December. I'm also planning to
create a simple handles most cases translator.
That's all ok with me, but not without an automatic translator
Chip~
On 11/29/05, Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider:
P0 = P1
P0 = S1
P0 = I1
P0 = N1
o/~ One of these things is not like the others
One of these things just doesn't belong o/~
And if I have to read:
P0 = new .Integer
P0 = 1
one more
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:08 -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='.
Is some different symbol possible, to avoid confusing people who use
Algol-like languages where := means assignment (Amber, Ada, Eiffel,
Delphi...)?
How about:
= for
From: Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 13:07:22 -0800
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
So aliasing copies the pointer (i.e. the object itself), and
assignment copies the value?
Right. Note, however, that you have to *have* a
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:45:12PM +, Roger Browne wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:08 -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='.
Is some different symbol possible, to avoid confusing people who use
Algol-like languages where := means
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 05:51:42PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
I think of PMCs as being objects, not containers for something else,
and := as meaning copy the object (which is synonymous with copy
the reference to the object) and = as copy the contents. Under
this interpretation, both are
On Nov 29, 2005, at 15:08, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Comments? Fresh or rotten vegetables?
My objections:
Consider:
P0 = P1
P0 = S1
P0 = I1
P0 = N1
o/~ One of these things is not like the others
One of these things just doesn't belong o/~
And if I have to read:
P0 =
29 matches
Mail list logo
