Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Jonathan Scott Duff
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 03:28:57PM -0700, Brent Dax wrote: > What if we have an instance variable $foo and a global $foo, and we want > to access the global? Do you mean if we've hidden a lexical of the same name in the same scope? I seem to recall something related to %MY that would let you acce

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Piers Cawley
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 01:13:42PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote: >> It does make me think, though... Would it make sense to have an >> accessor operator? For example, in Perl5 I would do this: >> >> sub foo { >> my $self = shift;

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 08:09:57AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote: > Larry has ideas, I have ideas... All good so far ;-) > However, I don't think the above syntax will be it. I think it would likely > be closer to: > > class Demo { > > my $.foo; > > method foo {

RE: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Brent Dax
Damian Conway: # Scott wrote: # #> Actually, I think it becomes: #> #> sub foo is method { #> my $old = .foo; #> .foo = shift if @_; #> return $old; #> } #> #> But, I could be wrong. Any Damians care to enlighten? :-) # # Well, I'm not a Damian,

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Damian Conway
Scott wrote: > Actually, I think it becomes: > >sub foo is method { > my $old = .foo; > .foo = shift if @_; > return $old; >} > > But, I could be wrong. Any Damians care to enlighten? :-) Well, I'm not a Damian, but I play one on perl6-l

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 01:53:09PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: > Actually, I think it becomes: > > sub foo is method { > my $old = .foo; > .foo = shift if @_; > return $old; > } > > But, I could be wrong. Any Damians care to enlighten? :-) I'm not

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 01:53:09PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 01:13:42PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote: > > In Perl6 with the unary ., that becomes: > > > > sub .foo (*@args) { > > my $old = $.{foo}; > > # So $obj.foo(undef) will work > >

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Jonathan Scott Duff
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 01:13:42PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote: > It does make me think, though... Would it make sense to have an > accessor operator? For example, in Perl5 I would do this: > > sub foo { > my $self = shift; > my $old = $self->{foo}; >

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 04:53:46PM -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: > Piers Cawley has written a nice article entitled: "Perl 6 : Not Just For > Damians". I had missed what unary . really did, and this explained it to me. I'm now much more excited about it as a "with"-like operator. It does make me

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Piers Cawley
Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:53:46 -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: > >>Piers Cawley has written a nice article entitled: "Perl 6 : Not Just For >>Damians". > >>http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2001/10/23/damians.html > > I just hope that you don't really have to inser

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Piers Cawley
Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> "GG" == Garrett Goebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > GG> Piers Cawley has written a nice article entitled: "Perl 6 : Not > GG> Just For Damians". > > GG> If the hair on the back of your neck rises when thinking about > GG> Perl 6, or even

Re: Perl 6 - Cheerleaders?

2001-10-26 Thread Bart Lateur
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 16:53:46 -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote: >Piers Cawley has written a nice article entitled: "Perl 6 : Not Just For >Damians". >http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2001/10/23/damians.html I just hope that you don't really have to insert that many blank lines in your code just to make it c