On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Trey Harris wrote:
: In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Allison Randal writes:
: So far, classes are uppercase and properties are lowercase, but that's
: convention, not law.
:
: Do runtime (value) properties and compile-time (variable) properties share
: the same
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 05:50:55PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Allison Randal wrote:
: use Acme::N-1_0; # or whatever the format of the name is
I don't see why it couldn't just be:
use Acme::1.0;
I agree thats better. But why not separate the version more by
* Larry Wall ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [12 Oct 2002 10:51]:
[...]
use Acme::1.0;
After all, we don't have package names starting with numbers right now...
Well, there's than Pod::Simple::31337, which confused search.cpan.org for a
bit. But none which _start_ with a number, no.
cheers,
--
On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Allison Randal wrote:
: use Acme::N-1_0; # or whatever the format of the name is
I don't see why it couldn't just be:
use Acme::1.0;
After all, we don't have package names starting with numbers right now...
Larry
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 04:11 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
: has Nose $.snout;
: has Ear .ears is cut(long);
: has Leg .legs;
: has Tail $.tail is cut(short);
:
: method Wag () {...}
: }
:
: What's the rationale
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Garrett Goebel wrote:
: That wasn't the way I remembered it from Apoc 4... The following example is
: not in A4, but its what I inferred from it...
:
: Class Foo {
: method eat($food) is abstract {
: PRE { ... }
: POST { ... }
: }
: }
A4 was proposing those for a
On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Peter Haworth wrote:
: This is the one nice thing about the Pascal-like syntax of Eiffel. It allows
: this situation to be unambiguous and sensibly ordered (as well as giving each
: condition labels, so that violations can be better reported):
:
: foo(this: ThisType, that:
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, John Williams wrote:
: On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Trey Harris wrote:
:
: Incidentally, has there been any headway made on how you DO access
: multiple classes with the same name, since Larry has (indirectly) promised
: us that? I.e., I import two classes LinkedList and BTree,
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 05:00:20PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Unfortunately, Java doesn't ship with JUnit nor do Java libraries usually
ship with tests nor does a simple convention to run them nor an expectation
that the user will run the tests before installing. Score one for Perl. :)
On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 05:23:08PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: I don't know, but I think it's supposed to be like this:
:
: # part of the signature
: method turn($dir,$ang) is pre { $ang = 20 } {
: ...
: }
:
: #
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
I was thinking more along the lines of:
$x $y
$x ||| $y
This isn't Perl; this is merely some language that looks a bit like
it. I can understand the attraction for confusing anyone who comes
from a standard Unix language background, but I'm
On 11 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
: I was thinking more along the lines of:
:
: $x $y
: $x ||| $y
:
: This isn't Perl; this is merely some language that looks a bit like
: it. I can understand the attraction for confusing anyone who comes
On 4 Oct 2002, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: There are a very large number of good things that I think we should put
: into properties for meta-programming purposes (e.g. constraints,
: assertions, optimization hints, documentation, etc).
:
: For example:
:
: sub f(int $a is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
I'm not sure either, and that's why I'm thinking about it. :-)
Phew.
--
Only two things are infinite: the Universe and human stupidity, and I'm
not sure about the former - Albert Einstein
At 3:55 PM -0700 10/11/02, Larry Wall wrote:
On 11 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
: I was thinking more along the lines of:
:
: $x $y
: $x ||| $y
:
: This isn't Perl; this is merely some language that looks a bit like
: it. I can understand
sub f(int $a is constrained($a=1,must be positive),
documented(an integer)) {
...
}
I now realize I'm a little fuzzy on the yada-yada-yada operator. What
exactly is it... or what does it do? Is it a statement, an
expression? Could you say
On Friday, Oct 11, 2002, at 23:21 Asia/Tokyo, Aaron Crane wrote:
Vaguely heretical, I know, but I'd be inclined to do something like
this:
Perl 5 Proposed Perl 6
$x $y $x $y
$x || $y $x | $y
$x $ybitand($x, $y)
$x | $ybitor($x, $y)
Objection, your honor.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: I think that, for me at least, it'll be close enough to C to be
: really confusing. (I already have the problem of leaving parens off
: of my function calls when I write XS code...) There's a certain
: appeal to not having to swap in
On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 04:11 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
has Nose $.snout;
has Ear .ears is cut(long);
has Leg .legs;
has Tail $.tail is cut(short);
method Wag () {...}
}
What's the rationale again for the dot in $.snout? Does it imply that
it
In a message dated Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Larry Wall writes:
A public inner class:
our class Node {...}
That last one actually declares a subclass of the current class, just as
our $foo;
puts $foo into the current package.
When you say subclass, do you mean below the current class in
20 matches
Mail list logo
