Howdy,
> Attached are a 3 very initial (skeletal in nature) Perl 6 .pod
> documents, based loosely on the Perl 5 documentation. It is my
> understanding that currently there is no P6-Pod reader e.g. "perl6doc"
> so these are actually written in P5-POD, but the intent is to
> eventually of course t
On the one hand, I've had 25 years of being annoyed about the idiom
if foo() == True ...
So I'd be delighted if P6 were to treat that case as a fatal compile-time
error.
And given that "==" are "!=" are just funny ways of writing "!xor" and
"xor", that prohibition could reasonably be ext
On 2010-08-02, at 2:35 pm, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
> On Monday, 2. August 2010 20:02:40 Mark J. Reed wrote:
>> [...] it's at least surprising. I'd expect (anything ~~ True) to be
>> synonymous with ?(anything)
> Note also that ($anything ~~ foo()) just throws away $anything.
No; only if foo(
On Tue, 3 Aug 2010, Carl Mäsak wrote:
Jason (>):
No specific tool is best suited for natural language processing. There was
apparently a time in which everyone thought that a formal grammar could
clearly define any natural language, but I don't think anyone succeeded at
creating a complete form
jnthn++ points out in meatspace that the invocant parameter has a
constraint (by spec but not in Rakudo), which will carry over to the
new class. Which means that only objects of child classes will
signature-bind anyway.
// Carl
On 2010-07-31 20:23, Carl Mäsak wrote:
* Today we discovered that it's possible to break encapsulation by
detaching a method from an object of one class, and calling that
method on an object of another class. Which means that breaking the
encapsulation of a foreign class is as easy as creating a
