In a message dated Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Noah White writes:
On Sunday, October 6, 2002, at 01:50 AM, Brent Dax wrote:
Parens don't construct lists EVER! They only group elements
syntactically. One common use of parens is to surround a
comma-separated list, but the *commas* are creating
Larry Wall wrote:
Parens don't construct lists in Perl 6. They merely group.
The only difference from Perl 5 is that if they happen to group a
comma in scalar context, the comma acts differently, not the parens.
Do parens still provide list context on the left side of an assignment?
What do
Do parens still provide list context on the left side of an assignment?
What do these two do:
my $x = ARGS;
my ($y) = ARGS;
Parens just grouping suggests that C$x and C$y should be the same
(which may well be good, as it's a subtle distinction which trips up
many beginners in Perl
Luke Palmer wrote:
my $x = ARGS;
my ($y) = ARGS;
Maybe:?
my ($y) ^= ARGS;
Or (presumably equivalently):
my $y ^= ARGS;
But that's horrible. Presumably with two or more variables the comma
would denote list context, so the caret is only needed for exactly one
variable.
Larry Wall wrote:
I cringe every time someone says Parens construct lists in Perl 6.
Parens don't construct lists in Perl 6.
: Additionally, parentheses have one inconsistency which brackets do not:
: This is the following case, already shown on perl6-language:
:
: $a = ();# $a is
Perl 6 summary for week beginning 2002-09-30
This is yet another Perl 6 summary, documenting what has happened over
on the perl6-internals (where Parrot, the virtual machine that will run
Perl 6 is discussed) and perl6-language (where Perl 6 language design is
discussed) mailing
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Luke Palmer wrote:
Do parens still provide list context on the left side of an assignment?
What do these two do:
my $x = ARGS;
my ($y) = ARGS;
Parens just grouping suggests that C$x and C$y should be the same
(which may well be good, as it's a subtle
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 04:01:26PM -0700, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 03:43:22PM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
You want something like
class Car is Vehicle renames(drive = accel)
is MP3_Player renames(drive = mp3_drive);
I *really* like this, but would the
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 01:49:26AM -0400, Noah White wrote:
OTOH, Java interfaces have a loophole which is considered a design
mistake.
An interface can declare some parts of the interface optional and then
implementors can decide if they want to implement it or not. The
upshot
being
Someone mysteriously known only as Ed asked what the favored syntax would be
to match negative multi-byte strings in Perl 6. It wasn't entirely clear
what the question was, but one thing is sure: the Perl 6 pattern matching
engine will have a lot of scope for optimisation.
Oops, sorry, just
On Sunday, October 6, 2002, at 06:17 PM, Daniel B. Boorstein wrote:
[SNIP]
I think there may be some confusion here. In java, there's no special
syntax
to declare a method an optional part of the interface. All concrete
classes
that implement the Collection interface still must define
11 matches
Mail list logo
