What happens if a resumable exception is propagated through a block with
a LEAVE, KEEP, or UNDO block? S04 seems to be a bit vague on this point.
It strikes me that what we want it to do is not execute them when the
exception is propagated, because we don't know whether it's going to be
resumed or
Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:13:16PM +1030, Tom Lanyon wrote:
: Sounds like the following will work, but it doesn't seem 'nice'.
:
: for @invoice
: {
: .process;
: 1;
: } or fail 'No invoices to process';
Still think if there's no invoices it logically should be tested first.
Author: audreyt
Date: Mon Mar 5 08:20:56 2007
New Revision: 14309
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
Log:
* S05: Minor fixup for this sentence no verb.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
==
---
Author: audreyt
Date: Mon Mar 5 08:27:24 2007
New Revision: 14310
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
* S12: Clarify that VAR(1) and VAR(@foo) are simply no-ops;
i.e., it applies to thiings other than Scalars, too.
Also fixed the postfix macro name and nomenclature
I was wondering about the semantics of coercion of non-numbers, so I
experimented with the interactive Pugs on feather:
pugs +42
42.0
pugs +x42
0.0
I assume that pugs is assuming no fail in the interactive environment.
However, Is 0.0 the correct answer, or should it be one of undef, or
NaN?
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 01:06:46PM +, Daniel Hulme wrote:
: What happens if a resumable exception is propagated through a block with
: a LEAVE, KEEP, or UNDO block? S04 seems to be a bit vague on this point.
: It strikes me that what we want it to do is not execute them when the
: exception is
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 09:01:13AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
I don't see a problem here. I think you maybe missed the bit that says:
A CCATCH block sees the lexical scope in which it was defined, but
its caller is the dynamic location that threw the exception. That is,
the stack
Author: larry
Date: Mon Mar 5 19:01:16 2007
New Revision: 14311
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
the change back from .give to .leave was incomplete as noted by rhr++.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
On 2/27/07, Jonathan Lang wrote:
David Green wrote:
So I end up back at one of Larry's older ideas, which basically is:
[] for counting, {} for keys.
What if you want to mix the two? I want the third element of row
5. In my proposal, that would be @array[5, *[2]]; in your
proposal, there
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 09:22:59AM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
: I was wondering about the semantics of coercion of non-numbers, so I
: experimented with the interactive Pugs on feather:
:
: pugs +42
: 42.0
: pugs +x42
: 0.0
:
: I assume that pugs is assuming no fail in the interactive
10 matches
Mail list logo
