On Mon, 8 Jul 2002, 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);
}
take_continuation() returns a continuation for the current point
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
Steve Simmons:
We have said that perl5 will be *mostly* mechanically translatable into
perl6.
And we shall keep saying this until we believe that it is true?
As a Perl user (the kind of guy who uses Perl at work for everything
humanly possible), I
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Sam Vilain wrote:
I can't count the number of times I've had to do something like:
if (defined $foo and $foo ne bar) { }
to avoid my program writing garbage to STDERR.
Of course you will now be able to say:
if ($foo // ne bar) { }
Right?
- D
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, David Nesting wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 09:37:39AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: Yep, but in Perl5, this was never very clean or obvious to the
: casual programmer. Constants have been coming of age in Perl,
: and they're kind of scary if they're not constant.
On
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Garrett Goebel wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, David Nesting wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 09:37:39AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: Yep, but in Perl5, this was never very clean or obvious to the
: casual programmer. Constants have been coming of age in Perl,
: and
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Damian Conway wrote:
To me Cis const means: the *value* stored in the memory
implementing this variable cannot be changed. Which doesn't preclude
rebinding the variable to some *other* memory.
But others have a different (and equally reasonable) interpretation of
Cis
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, David Whipp wrote:
. I know it uses valuable characters, but adding Cchomp? to
identify a query, and Cchomp! for an operation does not seem
unreasonable.
What about 'chomp?' for query but 'chomp' (no decoration) for operation?
I think using ? on method names is kind
When you say Unary here:
Binary (low) | Binary (high) |Unary
__|___|_
| |
or | || | |
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Backtracking is at the heart of Logic Programming (or Declarative
Programming, if you like). This is one of the 3 main programming paradigms
(along with procedural and functional). The most popular Declarative
language is Prolog. It is great
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Stephane Payrard wrote:
Hyper operators with operands of different size are partly covered
in A3:
Hyper operators will also intuit where a dimension is missing from one
of its arguments, and replicate a scalar value to a list value in that
dimension. That means
On 24 Apr 2001, Russ Allbery wrote:
Branden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) Use $obj.method instead of $obj-method :
The big question is: why fix what is not broken? Why introduce Javaisms
and VBisms to our pretty C/C++-oid Perl? Why brake compatibility with
Perl 5 code (and Perl 5
On 24 Apr 2001, Russ Allbery wrote:
David M Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What's wrong with using both? You could use - if you're working with a
reference to an object, and you could use . if you're working with the
object itself.
It seems relatively unlikely in the course
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:38:58AM -0500, David M. Lloyd wrote:
Well, right now in Perl, an object *is* a reference.
No. An object is a referent. Two blessed references can refer to the
same data; however, that's only one object.
Oops, that's what
On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, David Grove wrote:
The Perl 5 path is almost dead: adventurers and Win32 users are the
vast majority using it at all.
Since when?
Add Solaris 8 1/01 to the list of OS's that have completely rejected
5.6, as I discovered last night, and I'd imagine that there are more.
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Dave Storrs wrote:
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Peter Scott wrote:
At 09:36 AM 4/9/01 +0200, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
One liners are supposed to be SHORT. `--cmd' is LONG. If we MUST go
the multiflagged way, why not reflect `-e' to get the `-6' flag? At
the very least,
message --
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 08:16:24 -0600 (CST)
From: David M. Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Perl 5 Porters [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Distributive - and indirect slices
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My thinking was that not too many people
16 matches
Mail list logo
