May I suggest the following extension to the 'use ' pragma, viz.
use module name written in unicode and case sensitive in filename as
constrained by local system
For justification, see below.
asideThere were some hot replies to what I thought was a fairly
trivial question. A corollary
In a message dated Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Richard Hainsworth writes:
May I suggest the following extension to the 'use ' pragma, viz.
use module name written in unicode and case sensitive in filename as
constrained by local system
Oh please, no.
The entire point of the wording currently in the
A small tangent that might be relevant -- what's the current convention
for, say, putting several related packages in the same file?
In p5, I might write a great Foo.pm that loads Foo::Loader.pm and
Foo::Parser.pm and Foo::Object.pm; I'd usually drop them into seperate
files and have one load
Sorry, quoting myself...
In a message dated Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Trey Harris writes:
given $?OS {
when m:i:/win/ { use Foo in WinFoo.pm }
when m:i:/nix/ { use Foo in UnixLikeFoo.pm }
}
It strikes me that $?OS and $?OSVER should probably not be strings (as
they now are in Pugs) and
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 11:42:06AM -0500, Trey Harris wrote:
So $?OS isn't the type of OS, it's *the OS*, and you can manipulate the
OS through it.
Note that $?OS is the OS that is-or-was running at compile time,
whereas $*OS is the OS running right now (at run time). Those don't
have to be
In a message dated Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Larry Wall writes:
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 11:42:06AM -0500, Trey Harris wrote:
So $?OS isn't the type of OS, it's *the OS*, and you can manipulate the
OS through it.
Note that $?OS is the OS that is-or-was running at compile time,
whereas $*OS is the OS
if we take TimTowtdi strictly, the anser would be yes :)
sorry for nagging but my question about existence of ($min, $max) =
@array.minmax also seems vaporized.
cheers
herbert
On Monday 07 January 2008 08:42:06 Trey Harris wrote:
Then we can have roles that describe cross-cutting behavior of various
OS's (like POSIX):
my trytolink;
give $?OS {
when OS::HasSymlinks { trytolink := *symlink; }
when OS::HasLinks { trytolink := *link; }
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:05:18PM -0500, Trey Harris wrote:
And mix the role in to $*OS. Then call $*OS.trytolink() to get the proper
behavior at the proper time.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those, and now $*OS might even point to
thread-specific data.
Larry
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 08:22:34PM +0100, herbert breunung wrote:
if we take TimTowtdi strictly, the anser would be yes :)
Just as in Perl 5, you can say goto $label, with no guarantees
on efficiency.
sorry for nagging but my question about existence of ($min, $max) =
@array.minmax also
Dave Whipp wrote:
The tests in S02 LS02/Literal/In order to interpolate an entire hash
appear to assume that an interpolated hash renders its keys in a sorted
order. But this property doesn't seem to be stated in the text. Is it
true that the keys are always sorted for interpolation? (is it
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 05:23:36PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
The tests in S02 LS02/Literal/In order to interpolate an entire hash
appear to assume that an interpolated hash renders its keys in a sorted
order. But this property doesn't seem to be stated in the text. Is it true
that the keys
12 matches
Mail list logo
