--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 5:29 PM +0100 8/28/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 12:17:55PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:36 AM +0200 8/28/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Will there be automatic calling of the deserialization method
for objects, so that code like this DWIMs...
my Date
the current grammar
fully implemented :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
... :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears
number of folks are holding off installing 5.6.x because of various
issues with the original 5.6.0 release.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
At 8:23 AM -0700 7/31/02, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
[Pardon the tardiness--digging through old mail]
At 3:39 PM -0400 7/22/02, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 12:00 PM 7/22/2002 +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 11:21:09AM +0100, Graham Barr
the generated code by itself as a test? (At the moment, the
assembler's rather slow)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
encoding, so it
should be fine. (Though I bet a lot of folks will be rather surprised
when it happens...)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
At 12:34 PM -0400 7/17/02, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 12:13:47PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I thought Java used UTF-16. It's a variable-width encoding, so it
should be fine. (Though I bet a lot of folks will be rather surprised
when it happens...)
UTF-16 isn't technically
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
with in aggregate.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy
?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 5:46 AM +0100 7/11/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 4:24 PM +0100 7/10/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 9:50 PM -0400 7/9/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
3. Is C%MY intended to reflect the PAD
At 11:52 PM -0400 7/10/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to Dan Sugalski:
One pad per block, rather than per sub.
Because, of course, all blocks are subs. Got it.
Yep. (Well, modulo optimizations of course ;)
The place where you'll run into problems in where you have multiple
variables
At 7:18 PM +0100 7/11/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:41:20AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
The place where you'll run into problems in where you have multiple
variables of the same name at the same level, which you can do in
perl 5.
can it?
Yes.
can you give an example
At 2:47 PM -0400 7/11/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to Dan Sugalski:
At 9:50 PM -0400 7/9/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
3a. If so, how can one distinguish among the e.g. many Cmy $foo
variables declared within the current function?
One pad per block, rather than per sub
At 7:35 PM +0100 7/11/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 02:29:08PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:18 PM +0100 7/11/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:41:20AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
The place where you'll run into problems in where you have multiple
At 9:18 PM +0100 7/11/02, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 02:29:08PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:18 PM +0100 7/11/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:41:20AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
The place where you'll run into problems in where you have multiple
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
it to be used mainly for introspective things.
It's also useful, at compile time, for changing the caller's
environment, but that's not what we're worried about, I expect.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 4:24 PM +0100 7/10/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 9:50 PM -0400 7/9/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
3. Is C%MY intended to reflect the PAD?
Yes.
Hey! How's this for a scary thought:
$continuation.the_pad
What's that supposed to do, though
...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
. :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 3:01 PM -0700 7/8/02, Peter Scott wrote:
At 04:54 PM 7/8/02 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
A continuation is a sort of super-closure. Like a closure it
captures its lexical variables, so every time you use it, you're
referring to the same set of variables, which live on until the
continuation's
At 10:24 PM +0100 7/8/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 04:54:16PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Pretty simple. (For illustrative purposes) To do that with
continuations, it'd look like:
$cont = take_continuation();
if ($foo) {
$foo--;
invoke($cont
blocks, but even in languages where they're
fundamental constructs most people don't make use of them. (Or use
them very sparingly)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
would it? ;-P
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy
with
Duff's Device for them)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
, that and not minding the
first version likely getting tossed out when we do the final
implementation... :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
. :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
Perl class: stemsystems.com/class teddy bears get drunk
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
Perl class: stemsystems.com/class teddy bears get drunk
at runtime, since the type mismatch
can't be safely inferred at compile time.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have
At 10:10 AM -0400 5/15/02, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Sat, 2002-05-11 at 00:39, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 8:58 PM -0700 5/10/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was wondering how perl6 would stringify (as in Data::Dumper):
That's not stringification. It's serialization, which is a different
thing
of having the sub potentially redefined while you're
in it.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 9:26 AM -0400 5/7/02, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 16:26, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I forgot to announce the call for questions here (sorry), but the
answers 9and the questions) to the first round of Ask The Parrot have
been posted over on use.perl.
http://use.perl.org
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 2:26 PM +0100 4/26/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 01:25:15PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 12:36 PM -0400 4/23/02, Buddha Buck wrote:
OK, but that limits you to the, um, 24 standard levels of
precedence. What do you do if you don't think that that's enough
At 5:05 PM +0100 4/26/02, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 11:33:06AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 2:26 PM +0100 4/26/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 01:25:15PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 12:36 PM -0400 4/23/02, Buddha Buck wrote:
OK, but that limits you
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 7:25 AM -0700 4/11/02, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Dan == Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dan (Or maybe attributed string eval, like:
Dan $foo = eval.Parrot EOP
Dan set I0, 12
Dan sub I0, I0, 5
Dan EOP
That would make more sense to me (for whatever
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
set I0, 12
sub I0, I0, 5
EOP
Now that'd be interesting. Any parser module could be used. Hmmm)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
arguably pass a three element key
($a,$b,$c) to @multi_dim which, conveniently being a
three-dimensional array, returns a value itself.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even
*) Regexes
*) Double-quoted strings
*) Single-quoted strings
Adding another, or changing those, isn't a big deal.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL
and tail recursion works OK.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
At 4:22 PM -0800 4/4/02, Larry Wall wrote:
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 3:11 PM -0800 4/3/02, Larry Wall wrote:
: Piers Cawley writes:
: : Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: :
: : On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: : They are assumed to be declared
sorting, or do
we respect the locale?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
the block.
Just out of curiosity, is there anything macros (in the Lisp sense)
can do that source filters can't?
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
to a
holding area, and on return from code we need to reload from the
holding area. I think we can cope, though. :)
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
of actually
interesting stuff over there. How atypically slashdot...
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 4:17 PM -0500 1/18/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 03:35:59PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:16 AM +0200 1/18/02, raptor wrote:
Did u passed Bermuda Triangle :)
It may be a bit before Ex4 is done. Damian's on a cruise ship at the
moment, so even if he's got
http://www.unixreview.com/documents/s=1780/urm0111h/0111h.htm
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears
At 06:48 AM 11/9/2001 +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 04:21 PM 11/8/2001 -0800, John Rudd wrote:
So, does this mean my other heart's desire of operator overloading might
be coming forth? (I know, I know, here I am, a smalltalker, asking for
operator
, you mean being able to override the + function for a variable,
complete with method dispatch depending on the types of the variables on
both sides of the +?
Yup ;)
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
! bIQambogh DaqDaq qaHoH!
The biggest problem with reading mail from Damian is I keep wanting to
rot13 the thing..
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
who suggests an asm() function *will* get
smacked... :) You'll certainly be able to use modules written purely in
parrot assembly.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
At 05:12 PM 10/10/2001 +0200, RaFaL Pocztarski wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 08:37 AM 10/9/2001 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
For consistency, I'd prefer to use is: 3+(2 is i).
Well, the convention is suffixing an imaginary number with an i. I don't
think we'd be too well served to go
At 04:42 PM 10/10/2001 +0100, Sam Vilain wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:32:02 -0400
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great idea, as well as sqrt(-1) returning 1i istead of raising the
exception.
If we do them, yep. Currently no promises there.
If you do that, make sure it has
At 07:01 PM 10/10/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:52:16 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
If people want base 10, let them use e syntax.
1e3 = 1000
1k = 1024
I'll leave that for Larry to decide. I'm just thinking of all the 60G hard
drives I see at Best Buy
wherever they go.
$foo + $bar
will call $foo's overloaded add if it has one no matter where $foo's used.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED
...
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 12:12 PM 9/8/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
DS == Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DS Can anyone think of things I've forgotten? It's been a while since
I've
DS done numeric work.
i am not being picky, but there is secant, and arc hyperbolics too. you
can derive secant from
perfectly comfortable with, so I'm
fine. Once we've worked out how things should behave, then we can get on
with implementing it.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL
At 11:51 AM 9/6/2001 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
DS == Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DSmy $foo = 'a';
DS{
DS {
DS%MY[-1]{'$foo'} = 'B';
DSprint $foo;
DS }
DS }
explain %MY[-1] please.
my impression is that is illegal
At 02:05 PM 9/6/2001 -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
[stuff I snipped]
I'm worried a little about building features with global effects.
Part of Perl 6 is elimination of action-at-a-distance, but now
we're building the swiss-army-knife-of-action-at-a-distance.
I don't know how much
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
inside would do, either throwing the error or walking out. I can
see either way.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy
abused. It is very
awkward to use it for this purpose.
Fair enough. I don't much care what its called, as long as I know what it
does.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even
a number of cans of worms
I'd rather stay closed for now.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
against it, just that I can see some efficiency issues.
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 07:24 PM 9/4/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Tuesday 04 September 2001 07:25 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Ah, but what people will want is:
my $x = foo\n;
{
my $x = bar\n;
delete $MY::{'$x'};
print $x;
}
to print foo. That's where things get tricky
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
At 10:17 PM 9/3/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Monday 03 September 2001 09:30 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
A clever idea, and one I'd not though of. That's probably the best way to
do it. Has some other issues, like do we allow prototypes like:
sub foo ($$) {};
to be called
At 10:32 PM 9/3/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Monday 03 September 2001 10:27 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
To me, that seems only a language decision. This could certainly handle
that.
Ah, but calling in the first way has two PMCs in as parameters, while the
second has only one
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
this---
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
201 - 300 of 636 matches
Mail list logo
