The first message had many of the following characters viewable in my
telnet window, but the repost introduced a 0xC2 prefix to the 0xA7 character.
I have this feeling that many people would vote against posting all these
funny characters, as is does make reading the perl6 mailing lists
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 20021103
Welcome to the latest of the ongoing series of Perl 6 summaries, in
which your arrogant moderator does battle with the forces of prolixity
in a Brobdingnagian attempt to tame the tortuously tangled threads of
Perl 6's design and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Piers Cawley) writes:
* Superpositional operators will be too rare to justify giving them
precious one character operators.
I don't think I think that they'd be too rare. (I think) But I do
think that we're overinflating their importance. Changing the way
people
On Wed 06 Nov, Piers Cawley wrote:
miniparrot, a first attempt
If you've been paying attention to the Parrot build process, you'll be
aware that it was always a goal to use a cut down variant of parrot
itself to run the configuration tests. The plan is that this miniparrot
So, I was, thinking about the way Common Lisp handles keyword
arguments. It's possible to declare a Lisp function as follows:
(defun make-para ( content key alignment font size color ) ...)
The point here is that the first argument is dealt with positionally,
and subsequent, optional args
It occurred to me that being able to set up 'pure' functions in such a
way that they are lazily evaluated when passed a superposition might
be a win.
And then I got to thinking about what would be required from the
language to allow me to implement this functionality in a module. I am
assuming
I think Damian already covered this: it's the semicolon.
sub mysub(String $content; int $key, int $align)
{
...
}
sub callmysub
{
mysub(Testing .. 1, 2, 3!; key = 1024, align = Module::RIGHT);
}
Which, upon reflection, apparently introduces an implicit hashparsing
context for autoquoting
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
From: Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 12:44:39 +
X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
So, I was, thinking about the way Common Lisp handles keyword
arguments. It's possible to declare a
Austin Hastings said:
sub callmysub
{
mysub(Testing .. 1, 2, 3!; key = 1024, align = Module::RIGHT);
}
Which, upon reflection, apparently introduces an implicit hashparsing
context for autoquoting hashkeys.
Those are pairs, aren't they?
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ = 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 = $_ 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[grep 70 = $_ 80, @grades];
Granted, it's fairly compact as it is but I'm wondering if there's
some way to not have to mention
On 2002-11-06 at 11:43:20, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ = 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 = $_ 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[grep 70 = $_ 80, @grades];
I think what you mean here is just
@a =
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Austin Hastings said:
sub callmysub
{
mysub(Testing .. 1, 2, 3!; key = 1024, align = Module::RIGHT);
}
Which, upon reflection, apparently introduces an implicit hashparsing
context for autoquoting hashkeys.
Those are pairs, aren't they?
Yup.
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 12:54:12PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2002-11-06 at 11:43:20, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ = 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 = $_ 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[grep 70 = $_
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ = 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 = $_ 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[grep 70 = $_ 80, @grades];
Granted, it's fairly compact as it is but I'm wondering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Piers Cawley) writes:
I confess I never quite understood why the python folks were so proud
of list comprehensions, AFAICT they're just 'grep' and 'map' given
fancy descriptions.
Well, sort of. They're more like this:
@array[grep { func() } 0..$#array]
--
If you
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 12:54:12PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2002-11-06 at 11:43:20, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
a = grades[grep $_ = 90, grades];
b = grades[grep 80 = $_ 90, grades];
c = grades[grep 70 = $_
Piers Cawley wrote:
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ = 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 = $_ 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[grep 70 = $_ 80, @grades];
Granted, it's fairly compact as it is but I'm
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 07:27:56PM -0800, Brian Ingerson wrote:
: Mutt?
:
: I'm using mutt and I still haven't had the privledge of correctly viewing one
: of these unicode characters yet. I'm gonna be really mad if you say you're
: also using an OS X terminal. I suspect that it's my horrific OS
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, at 11:18 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
Since you're interested in the management of the Perl 6 project, I'll
let you in on some of it. Let's start with a step back into a bit of
history:
OK, let me pause for a second... pause, pause, pause... OK, I'm better
now.
--- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that if there were a slice-based form of grep, it would most
likely look like you are indexing by a subroutine (or method)
reference
that takes no arguments other than an element of the array.
Something like:
@a = @grades[{$^x 90}];
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 11:36:45AM -0500, Ken Fox wrote:
: Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
:
: Um ... could we have a zip functor as well? I think the common case
: will be to pull N elements from each list rather than N from one, M
: from another, etc. So, in the spirit of timtowtdi:
:
: for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
Big, Big HOLE in the middle. _Who_ is fleshing out the mindless,
trivial details that Larry posts to this list, and _who_ is
creating/updating the documentation to reflect those changes? Anyone?
Allison is, but she was too modest to say so. (And I
[Apologies for late reply, but it takes a long time to read this many
messages]
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:37:09 -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
1) Need a definitive syntax for hypers,
^[op] and «op»
have been most seriously proposed -- something that
keeps a bracketed syntax, but
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 08:18:18PM +0100, Dennis Haney wrote:
: Michael Lazzaro wrote:
:
: ~ - force to string context
:
: ~ ~= - string concat
:
: ARG. When did this get chosen?
: ~ has to be absolutly the most difficult letter to type on the intire
: keyboard
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002 11:13:36 -0800 Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're not supposed to use string concatenation
all that often anyway...
I'm not supposed (for some value of supposed) to use Perl at my job, but I do,
and I suspect I use string concatenation in about one script in five, so
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
[list comprehensions]
(bb clarified that this is about hash slicing.)
From A2:
RFC 201: Hash Slicing
...Concise list comprehensions will require
some other syntax within the subscript...
And
There are many ways we could
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 04:26:58PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So what say you? Can we migrate perl6-language into a list that
finalizes aspects of the design, documents them, and revises them as
needed, rather than our usual circular discussions of things already
long-since past?
What
You know, guys, I already discussed this one in A4 or thereabouts.
It's the use of an explicit boolean operator as a subscript that
triggers selection.
Larry
On Tue, 05 Nov 2002 23:18:01 -0800, Allison Randal wrote:
If you really want to be involved where the rubber meets the road -- where the
abstract design gets tested and every last detail must be fleshed out -- you
might contribute to Parrot. It has a good many of the features of the first 5
I don't see why I'd want to do it with arrays, but...
%a_students = %grades{grep /^a/i, keys %grades};
Looks like that's just the same as
%a_students = grep {.key ~~ :i/^a/}, %grades.kv;
(after adjusting for perl6 syntax for a few things)
--
Adam Lopresto ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 06:58:52PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
Big, Big HOLE in the middle. _Who_ is fleshing out the mindless,
trivial details that Larry posts to this list, and _who_ is
creating/updating the documentation to reflect those
On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 10:58 AM, Simon Cozens wrote:
It's all at http://cvs.perl.org/cvsweb/perl6/doc/design/
No, that's the Apocalypses and Exegesiii, though very nicely cleaned
up. I'm talking about detailed documentation for the things the A's
and E's don't cover.
MikeL
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 11:36:50AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
You know, guys, I already discussed this one in A4 or thereabouts.
It's the use of an explicit boolean operator as a subscript that
triggers selection.
I thought so, but I couldn't find it.
thanks,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
Peter Haworth writes:
a ^[alpha_op] +3
You can parse this in two ways:
* array a, hyperop alpha_op, unary plus, literal 3
* array a, binary xor, call alpha_op and put result in arrayref,
binary plus, literal 3
I think this was already discusse dbefore .
^ - xor and ^[]
We started off with an intense RFC process. This produced many good
ideas, not-so-good ideas, and ideas with potential but desperately
needing polish. If you'd like a recap, you might try MJD's article
on the subject (http://www.perl.com/lpt/a/2000/11/perl6rfc.html).
One of the major things
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
No, that's the Apocalypses and Exegesiii, though very nicely cleaned
up. I'm talking about detailed documentation for the things the A's
and E's don't cover.
Ah, well, they don't cover that. I thought that was what you were doing,
right? :)
--
So
On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 12:10 PM, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
No, that's the Apocalypses and Exegesiii, though very nicely cleaned
up. I'm talking about detailed documentation for the things the A's
and E's don't cover.
Ah, well, they don't
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 01:50:10PM -0600, Allison Randal wrote:
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 06:58:52PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
Big, Big HOLE in the middle. _Who_ is fleshing out the mindless,
trivial details that Larry posts to this list, and
I'm going to repeat what chromatic said (even though I've deleted his message)
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 09:57:58PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
- Finish the details that may be not complete in the Apocalypses
(there are plenty of them)
write specifications of all the detailed bits as regression
Angel Faus wrote:
So, while we all wait for Larry to wait the design, is there any
reason not to start working in the documentation?
Any chance of getting a wiki setup at:
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/cathecism/
Say using a wiki which uses pod for markup like:
At 2:26 PM -0600 11/6/02, Garrett Goebel wrote:
Angel Faus wrote:
So, while we all wait for Larry to wait the design, is there any
reason not to start working in the documentation?
Any chance of getting a wiki setup at:
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/cathecism/
Wikis have serious scaling
At 9:57 PM +0100 11/6/02, Angel Faus wrote:
It's like this: Larry writes the Apocalypses, Damian the Exegesis, and
the community writes the Cathecism (a codified, detallied and
anonymous explanation of the most boring details of the faith,
written in a form that plain people can understand).
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 10:54:23AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
-- The latest news on the Perl6 section of dev.perl.org was updated
July 7th, introducing Piers, and other than linking to Piers' summaries
contains no information pertinent to Perl6 -- only Parrot.
Sounds like a place you
On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 12:26 PM, Garrett Goebel wrote:
Angel Faus wrote:
So, while we all wait for Larry to wait the design, is there any
reason not to start working in the documentation?
Yes! Someone gets it! The Apocalypses and Exegesis are not formal
documentation, they're
At 2:44 PM -0600 11/6/02, Allison Randal wrote:
The obstruction you're imagining doesn't exist. The Parroteers ask for
guidance from Dan. When Dan feels the details aren't clear enough yet he
brings the issue to the rest of the design team. When none of us can
give him an immediate answer
My apologies for one more post, but I find the assertions various
people have posted on this topic to be absolutely astounding.
On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 12:44 PM, Allison Randal wrote:
I don't *WANT* to write damn documentation. I wrote a first-chapter
summary of some basic
If anyone knows the answer to these two questions, I'd appreciate it.
1) What do these do?
my int $n = 5; # OK
my int $n = 5.005; # trunc or err?
my int $n = 5.05ff # 5, 0, undef, NaN, or exception?
my int $n = fdsjfdf# 0, undef, NaN, or exception?
2) Do
Nicholas Clark wrote:
Not good. 5 patches means that 4 people wasted effort trying to help.
I don't have a solution to this problem (sorry). But I think it's an
important problem to solve.
Wasted effort is a problem. I don't know that a perfect solution exists.
Parrot's solution of making
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 14:53:37 -0800
From: Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
If anyone knows the answer to these two questions, I'd appreciate it.
1) What do these do?
This is getting silly.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
Seriously, don't patronize me: it won't get you anywhere productive,
and it just ticks me off. I am not _unaware_ of the current Perl6
dynamics and management decisions; on the contrary, I am observing
that the current
At 11:15 PM + 11/6/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
I think you're equating a pool of available talent and labor with
a pool of willing talent and labour. Everyone is willing to offer
suggestions, but few people - you being one of the few - are willing
to put the time into thrashing these suggestions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
1) There *must* be someone who will drive the discussion, or it will
wander off into some bizarre corner and die
That's the job of the Apo pumpkin.
2) Under no circumstances can Larry be allowed to subscribe, or even
read, the lists. :)
I thought
On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, at 03:34 PM, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 11:15 PM + 11/6/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
Here is my suggested solution to the problem.
And, though, snipped, a fine solution it is, with two caveats:
1) There *must* be someone who will drive the discussion, or it will
At 11:39 PM + 11/6/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
2) Under no circumstances can Larry be allowed to subscribe, or even
read, the lists. :)
I thought that was so obvious it wasn't worth mentioning. :)
It's the blatantly obvious stuff that gets missed
Adam D. Lopresto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't see why I'd want to do it with arrays, but...
%a_students = %grades{grep /^a/i, keys %grades};
Looks like that's just the same as
%a_students = grep {.key ~~ :i/^a/}, %grades.kv;
I think you could probably get away without the .kv there
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 14:53:37 -0800
From: Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
If anyone knows the answer to these two questions, I'd
Every primitive type has an associated object type, whose name differs only
by capitalized first letter. A few posts back, Larry mentioned that perhaps
similar things should look different: this may be a good case to apply this
principle.
Whenever a value passes through a primitive type, it loses
At 6:50 PM -0800 11/6/02, David Whipp wrote:
Whenever a value passes through a primitive type, it loses all its run-time
properties; and superpositions will collapse.
What makes you think so, and are you really sure?
--
Dan
Dan Sugalski [mailto:dan;sidhe.org] wrote:
At 6:50 PM -0800 11/6/02, David Whipp wrote:
Whenever a value passes through a primitive type, it
loses all its run-time properties; and superpositions
will collapse.
What makes you think so, and are you really sure?
I was sure up until the
At 8:24 PM -0800 11/6/02, David Whipp wrote:
If I am wrong, then I am in need of enlightenment. What
is the difference between the primitive types and their
heavyweight partners? And which should I use in a typical
script?
The big difference is there's no way you can ever truly get a
primitive
David Whipp wrote:
Dan Sugalski [mailto:dan;sidhe.org] wrote:
At 6:50 PM -0800 11/6/02, David Whipp wrote:
Whenever a value passes through a primitive type, it
loses all its run-time properties; and superpositions
will collapse.
What makes you think so, and are you really sure?
Dan Sugalski [mailto:dan;sidhe.org] wrote:
At 8:24 PM -0800 11/6/02, David Whipp wrote:
If I am wrong, then I am in need of enlightenment. What
is the difference between the primitive types and their
heavyweight partners? And which should I use in a typical
script?
The big difference is
I gotta admit that this issue is bugging me too. Larry mentions (in
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=Pine.LNX.4.44.0210140927520.20533-10%40london.wall.org)
that all-uppercase is ugly and has boundary conditions.
Maybe it would be helpful to know what conditions are
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote:
Here is my suggested solution to the problem.
And, though, snipped, a fine solution it is, with two caveats:
There's potential here. If we arrange it so Larry can stay focused and
the total productivity of the project increases, we'll have a good
64 matches
Mail list logo
