On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 02:10:17PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
I recall reading that at least in certain math/logic papers that a
programming language type system can be defined logically in terms
of pure sets, making it essentially self-defined without needing to
rely on external definitions
What is the behaviour of an *uncaught* exception, particularly with
respect to CHECK/END/LEAVE/LAST blocks, destructors, overloading of
the stringify operator on exception objects, the order in which these
things are executed, and the exit code of the process? (And anything
else that I haven't
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 12:37:33AM -0700, Trey Harris wrote:
I misstated my worry here. In this case, by the same rule that my Dog
$foo gets the right version because the longname is aliased to the
shortname in the lexical scope of the use, it would work.
What I'm actually concerned about
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 10:50:31AM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
#{
if $baz {
$foo.bar
}
}
To uncomment, remove the # before the {.
This is exactly the type of construct that I had in mind. A couple of
questions. Is code inside of a #{}:
- parsed and required
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 03:55:56PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
The important question here is this one:
- when 'uncommented', is it a no-op?
Which isn't true for #{}/{}, because {} introduces new lexical
scope.
Why would you care about introducing a new lexical scope? You would
care
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:00:17AM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
As a lead-in, I should say that Synopsis 3 has a good and complete
explanation of these matters and has had it for several weeks, in my
opinion.
Since you are wanting to compare two mutable Array, just use the eqv
operator,
