Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote:
As for
marking each op individually, it might be possible if we add a
whitespace dependency between lt:lc and lt :lc, but 1 ..:by(2) 100
is pretty ugly.
Larry
So do they have to go at the end of the whole expression in the current grammar?
I
See my latest creation at http://www.dlugosz.com/Perl6/web/APL.html
What about adverbs on reduction operators?
[lt :lc] $a,$b,$c # all in decreasing order
--John
TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote:
As I recall, it can handle the concept of Inf-1 etc.
Yes. But the Hyperreals do the same and stay within the realm
of set theory.
I'm not sure. A quick reading indicates that ⋆ℝ contains infinitely large
numbers that maintain the
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 3:19 PM, John M. Dlugosz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure. A quick reading indicates that ⋆ℝ contains infinitely large
numbers that maintain the properties of addition, but that is not the same
as infinity.
Well *R is a field that has infinitely large and small
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
The proposed Infinite class (see the thread I started on 4/25/2008) does
handle transfinite cardinals.
Do you mean the thread called The Inf type where I replied to your
post of a version of your specdoc? My concern with the approach you take
there is to base it
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
See my latest creation at http://www.dlugosz.com/Perl6/web/APL.html
Nice write-up! You say that there's no syntax for refering to a multi
as a whole. But is that not simply the short name? E.g. infix:+ is
the multi of all targets in a scope. You need
Hi
See my latest creation at http://www.dlugosz.com/Perl6/web/APL.html
A modern decendent of APL is J
http://www.jsoftware.com/
http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/FrontPage
Regards,
Todd Olson
I'm trying to do a Perl script (PC has Perl5 installed) in a BAT file
which will open the CMD prompt, interact with the user and copy files
from one location to other directories. Does anyone know how to dir
the files in a directory into an array and sort by date and return the
ones within the
Supporting multiple levels of infinities, transfinite numbers or even Surreal
Numbers should be considered in the same category of features as returning
multiple answers from complex trig functions.
They're an interesting thing to discuss and experiment with but shouldn't
distract form getting
HaloO,
Xavier Noria wrote:
IMO to include something related to infinity you need to stick with
some particular model and forget the rest.
Well spoken. But I think that the model John has chosen is a bit
too restrictive. If a type has a notion of Zero it could have a
similar notion of infinity
HaloO,
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
So do they have to go at the end of the whole expression in the current
grammar? I don't follow about the spaces.
The problem is term versus operator parsing.
Do you write
$a lt:lc $b le:lc $c
I think that works and looks best. My favorite hope is
HaloO,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's just make sure we're handling inf and -inf right and leave all
that other stuff until later.
The point is: what is the minimum we need to be future proof
and compatible to other language features.
Regards, TSa.
--
The unavoidable price of reliability
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 06:15:07PM +0200, TSa wrote:
Do you write
$a lt:lc $b le:lc $c
I think that works and looks best. My favorite hope is that
$x = log:2 $y;
flies, as well.
$x = log:base(2) $y;
is a bit lengthy and
$x = log $y, :base(2);
looks more like a two
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
The whitespace proposal is essentially to
require whitespace between any operator any following pair if the
pair is intended to be a noun and not an adverb.
So, then my log:base(2) would still look for the positional argument,
right?
Alternately, we could force
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:04:41AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
What about adverbs on reduction operators?
[lt :lc] $a,$b,$c # all in decreasing order
I don't think that'll fly because reduce operators are parsed as single
tokens to disambiguate them from array composers, and there are
Perhaps I'm missing something; but why couldn't you say '[lt]:lc $a, $b, $c'?
That is, I see the reducing meta-operator as a way of taking a
list-associative infix operator and treating it as a function call,
albeit one with a funny name. As such, you should be able to do
things with a reduced
Jonathan ():
That this means the { $_ = uc $_; } above would end up composing a Hash
object (unless the semicolon is meant to throw a spanner in the
hash-composer works?) It says you can use sub to disambiguate, but
%ret = map sub { $_ = uc $_; }, split , $text;
Doesn't work since $_ isn't
18 matches
Mail list logo
