On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 11:15:24PM -0700, jerry gay wrote:
: according to S02, under 'Literals', generalized quotes may now take
: adverbs. in that section is the following comment:
:
: snip
: [Conjectural: Ordinarily the colon is required on adverbs, but the
: quote declarator allows you to
On 5/10/06, Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark A. Biggar wrote:
Use hyper compare ops to select what you want followed by using filter
to prune out the unwanted.
filter gives you with scan:
filter (list [] @array) @array ==
first monotonically increasing run in
Damian Conway skribis 2006-05-10 18:07 (+1000):
More than that, the current 'rule' and 'regex' can both be used inside
and outside a grammar. If we were to take the 'sub'/'method' pattern, then
'rule' should never be allowed outside a grammar,
I entirely agree.
I don't. While disallowing
In the previous mail I accidentally read [=] as [=]
On 5/10/06, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
filter (list [=] @array) @array ==
first monotonically non-decreasing run in @array
So @array = (1 0 -1 -2 -1 -3) == (1, -1) is monotonically non-decreasing?
This would
On 5/9/06, Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 06:07:26PM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
ps. Should first element of scan be 0-argument or 1-argument case.
i.e. should list([+] 1) return (0, 1) or (1)
I noticed this in earlier posts and thought it odd that anyone
Allison wrote:
I've never met anyone who *voluntarily* added
the 'p'. ;-)
You've spent too much time in the U.S. ;)
And Australia. I don't know where the silent 'p' comes from but it sure ain't
the New World.
Picking names that mean what they say is important in Perl. It's why we have
qX ::= q:x:y:z;
as a simple, argumentless word macro.
But would that DWIM when I come to write
qX(stuff, specifically not an adverb argument);
?
--
The rules of programming are transitory; only Tao is eternal.
Therefore you must contemplate Tao before you receive
On Wed, 10 May 2006, Damian Conway wrote:
Allison wrote:
I've never met anyone who *voluntarily* added
the 'p'. ;-)
You've spent too much time in the U.S. ;)
and the fact that everyone knows 'regex(p)'
means regular expression no matter how may times we say it doesn't.
Sure. But
Allison Randal schreef:
Damian:
Match is a better word for what comes back from
a regex match (what we currently refer to as a Capture, which is
okay too).
I agree there. I still prefer 'rule'.
Maybe matex (mat-ex) for matching expression and, within that,
capex/captex (cap-ex/capt-ex) for
Damian Conway schreef:
grammar Perl6 is skip(/[ws+ | \# brackets | \# \N]+/) {
...
}
I think that first + is superfluous.
Doubly so if ws already stands for the run of all consecutive
word-separators.
--
Groet, Ruud
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 06:07:54PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Including :skip(/someotherrule/). Yes, agreed, it's a huge
improvement. I'd be more comfortable if the default rule to
use for skipping was named skip instead of ws.
(On IRC sep was also proposed, but the connection between
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:25:26AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
: True. Token is the wrong word for another reason: a token is a
: segments component of the input stream, *not* a rule for matching
: segmented components of the input stream. The correct term for that is
: terminal. So a suitable
Larry wrote:
So anyway, I think token is sufficiently close to what we want
it to mean that we can force it to mean that, and it's sufficiently
orphaned that few people are going to complain about impressing it
into forced labor.
I'm perfectly fine with that. To quote myself out of context:
AR == Allison Randal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AR Including :skip(/someotherrule/). Yes, agreed, it's a huge
AR improvement. I'd be more comfortable if the default rule to use
AR for skipping was named skip instead of ws. (On IRC sep was
AR also proposed, but the connection between
To summarize a phone call today, the more intelligent defaults we add to
differently named rule keywords the more comfortable I am with having
different names. So, here's what we have so far (posted both as an FYI
and to confirm that we have the coherent solution I think we have):
rule:
- Has
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 05:58:57PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
To summarize a phone call today, the more intelligent defaults we add to
differently named rule keywords the more comfortable I am with having
different names. So, here's what we have so far (posted both as an FYI
and to
Allison admirably summarized:
rule:
regex:
token:
skip:
- We keep :words as shorthand for :skip(/ws/)
- And :skip is shorthand for :skip(/skip/)
...where skip defaults to ws, but is distinct from it (i.e. it can be
redefined independently).
- To change skipping behavior: a) override
17 matches
Mail list logo
