On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 07:27:56PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
What benefit does C ~ bring to the language?
Again, it provides not just a null operator between to calls, but
rather a rewrite of method call syntax. So:
map {...} ~ grep {...} ~ @boing;
is not:
map {...} grep {...}
Joseph F. Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
The tokeniser could send two tokens else and if whenever it
recognizes the keyword elsif -- so this isn't a problem.
I think the point of having Cif as a sub rather
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 10:04:58 +
From: Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If the function form of map/grep were to be removed, which has been
suggested, and the ~ form maps to methods. How would you go about
defining a utility module similar to List::Util that uses the same
syntax as
Damian Conway writes:
Buddha Buck wrote:
Perl 5 allows you to do:
$object-meth1-meth2-meth3; # Perl5 chained method, L2R
Perl 6 will also allow you to do:
$data ~ sub1 ~ sub2 ~ sub3;# Perl6 chained subs, L2R
Perl 5 allows you to to:
sub3
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 02:04 AM, Graham Barr wrote:
If the function form of map/grep were to be removed, which has been
suggested,
and the ~ form maps to methods. How would you go about defining a
utility
module similar to List::Util that uses the same syntax as map/grep but
without
On Monday, January 20, 2003, at 04:33 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
But both the OO and pipeline syntaxes do more to point out the noun,
verb, and adjective of the operation.
Adverb. The {...} part is an adverb, not an adjective. Sorry there.
MikeL
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 09:20:04AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 02:04 AM, Graham Barr wrote:
If the function form of map/grep were to be removed, which has been
suggested,
and the ~ form maps to methods. How would you go about defining a
utility
Smylers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
And an alternative
spelling for the assignment operator[*0] doesn't strike me as something
Perl is really missing:
$msg ~ 'Hello there';
$msg = 'Hello there';
I still remember the first time I saw a computer program, before I had
learned
Rafael Garcia-Suarez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
The tokeniser could send two tokens else and if whenever it
recognizes the keyword elsif -- so this isn't a problem.
The primary advantage, to my mind, in using Celsif, is that it eliminates
the dangling-else ambiguity -- so splitting it in
On 2003-01-21 at 11:09:21, Thom Boyer wrote:
One of the most... er, *interesting*, dodges I've seen in this area is the
one used by Squeak (a Smalltalk variant). Squeak spells assignment with an
underscore (_), but the Squeak system *draws* it as a left-pointing arrow.
There's a history behind
Thom Boyer wrote:
Smylers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
And an alternative spelling for the assignment operator[*0] doesn't
strike me as something Perl is really missing:
$msg ~ 'Hello there';
$msg = 'Hello there';
I still remember the first time I saw a computer program
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:21:08PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed more
deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for Perl,
right?
True. But I suspect that TPF's position is that, to many
Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 07:27:56PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
What benefit does C ~ bring to the language?
Again, it provides not just a null operator between to calls, but
rather a rewrite of method call syntax. So:
map {...} ~ grep {...} ~
David Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:21:08PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed more
deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for Perl,
right?
True. But I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 21 January 2003 07:16 am, Simon Wistow wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:14:29PM +0100, K Stol said:
LUA seems to be a very nice language, but how is this language to be
used? Is it in combination with a C program one would write? Or
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 12:26 PM, Piers Cawley wrote:
Though I'm sure Damian will be long eventually to correct my
syntax. I'm getting this weird feeling of deja vu though...
When I come home from work each day, I can see my dog eagerly waiting
at the window, just black snout and
I just finished skimming this write-up, located at
http://paulgraham.com/arcll1.html
I'm not a Lisp enthusiast, by and large, but I think he makes some
interesting observations on language design. Take a look if you're
feeling adventurous...
-r
--
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; phone: +1
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 12:26 PM, Piers Cawley wrote:
Though I'm sure Damian will be long eventually to correct my
syntax. I'm getting this weird feeling of deja vu though...
When I come home from work each day, I can see my dog eagerly
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Monday, January 20, 2003, at 12:30 PM, Smylers wrote:
It was only on reading that (and discovering that you hadn't
previously known about the 'optional comma with closure argument'
rule) that I understood why you had previously been so in favour of
proposed
Thom Boyer wrote:
The primary advantage, to my mind, in using Celsif, is that it
eliminates the dangling-else ambiguity -- so splitting it in half
removes almost ALL the value of even having an Celsif keyword.
Surely it's the compulsory braces, even with a single statement, which
eliminates
This is a valuable discussion, and I hope people will take this up on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] as well.
Thanks,
John A
see me fulminate at http://www.jzip.org/
--- Thom Boyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Smylers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
And an alternative
spelling for the assignment operator[*0] doesn't strike me as
something
Perl is really missing:
$msg ~ 'Hello there';
$msg = 'Hello there';
I still remember the first
--- David Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:21:08PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed
more
deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for
Perl,
right?
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 01:31 PM, Smylers wrote:
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
it's that I _dislike_ the perl5 rule, ...
Oh. That's dislike rather than disliked? My question was
predicated on your declaration I emphatically withdraw my objection,
which I took to mean that your knowledge
Smylers wrote:
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
And it provides a very visual way to define any pipe-like algorithm, in
either direction:
$in - lex - parse - codify - optimize - $out; # L2R
$out - optimize - codify - parse - lex - $in; # R2L
It's clear, from looking at either of those,
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 02:38 PM, Buddha Buck wrote:
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
And it provides a very visual way to define any pipe-like algorithm,
in either direction:
$in - lex - parse - codify - optimize - $out; # L2R
$out - optimize - codify - parse - lex - $in; # R2L
MJR == Mark J Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
MJR On 2003-01-21 at 11:09:21, Thom Boyer wrote:
One of the most... er, *interesting*, dodges I've seen in this area
is the one used by Squeak (a Smalltalk variant). Squeak spells
assignment with an underscore (_), but the Squeak system
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 02:21:58PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- David Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is something along the lines of the applied research vs basic
research question. What Larry is doing pretty much amounts to basic
research that will help all of these other
28 matches
Mail list logo
