Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm kind of curious to know what you think would happen with the
following. I've commented where I'm confident...
interface Number;
sub TIESCALAR;
sub STORE;
sub FETCH;
package integer implements Number; # I really
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 05:25:28AM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
Not an awful lot was said once this RFC was condensed down to "Everything
becomes an object". I believe some implementation and conceptual hurdles
exist which have discouraged more
Robert Mathews [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Cozens wrote:
(defun Schwartzian (func list)
(mapcar
(lambda (x) (car x))
(sort
(mapcar
(lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
list
)
(lambda (x y) ( (cdr x) (cdr y)))
)
)
)
Maybe
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Readability is a programmer feature, not a language feature.
The most important optimization a programmer can make is to optimize
for understanding.
--
Piers
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 03:49:10PM +0100, Tom Christiansen wrote:
Don't change "use less" to "use optimize". We don't
need to ruin the cuteness.
"use less 'rolled_loops';" sounds really weird.
We obviously need to introduce a synonymous
Cuse fewer
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Transparently integrate Ctie
On the whole I think I'm liking this. But it needs work.
my packed $a; # just an assertion, RFC 218
$a =
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Ban Perl hooks into regexes
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
C@STACK - a modifyable Ccaller()
Why am I having bad thoughts along the lines of:
local @STACK = @SAVED_STACK
I don't know what'd do, but it'd be
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Perl should not abort when a required file yields a false value
We had this RFC from Damian already didn't we?
--
Piers
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* The new Cinterface keyword would be unnecessary if *package
specifications* could take attributes:
interface Fetcher;
would then become:
package Fetcher : interface;
I'm not
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By specifying "use interface" explicitly, you can make sure that your
class follows the interface spec. Otherwise, you rely on other classes
in the hierarchy above you doing so, and then you indirectly inheriting
from that interface. So "use interface"
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems potentially useful to be able to say:
my Dog, Cat $fluffy;
As a way to say "$fluffy can be either a Dog or a Cat". Since variables
are prefixed, anything comma-separated up to the variable is an
alternate class for that variable:
Eurgh.
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 09:48:27AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nope. fields::new() basically just does Cbless
[\%{"$class\::FIELDS"}], $class, but the current pseudohash
implementati
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 02:19:38PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
package Dog;
use fields qw(this night up);
my Dog $ph = [];
$ph-{this} = "that";
That works? I t
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers wrote:
I'm kind of tempted to look at adding another pragma to go with 'use
base' along the lines of:
use implements 'Interface';
Which is almost entirely like Cuse base 'Interface' but with
'Interface'
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Objects: Cuse invocant pragma
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 14 September 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL
Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would suggest that anyone want to contribute to this discussion should
first read the thread about the addition of this pragma to perl5 in
the perl5-porters archives
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Cmy Dog $spot is just an assertion
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 13th September 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL
Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perl6 RFC Librarian writes:
I therefore propose that Cmy Dog $spot comes to mean that C$spot
is restricted to being either undefined or a reference to a CDog
object (or any subclasses of Dog). Simply having this implicit
assertion can be
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 08:43:43PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
The behaviour of the my Dog $spot syntax should simply be an
assertion of the invariant:
(!defined($spot) || (ref($spot) $spot-isa('Dog)))
What about the current
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers wrote:
The behaviour of the my Dog $spot syntax should simply be an
assertion of the invariant:
(!defined($spot) || (ref($spot) $spot-isa('Dog)))
(!defined($spot) || (ref($spot) $spot-isa('Dog')))
Hildo Biersma [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley wrote:
=head1 ABSTRACT
Cmy Big::Long::Prefix::Class $object = Big::Long::Prefix::Class-Egtnew
is a pain in the bum to type. We should replace this with
use namespace 'Big::Long::Prefix';
my ::Class $object = ::Class
=head1 TITLE
Cmy Dog $spot is just an assertion
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12th September 2000
Last Modified: 12th September 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Version: 0
Status: Draft
=head1 ABSTRACT
The behaviour of the my Dog $spot syntax
Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't want a set representation. I want set operations. And somehow
for this having to add a use statment and who knows what overhead for
what seems to be a simple operation is a pain.
The overhead is not that it should be a module, but rather,
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 09:53:39PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
Objects : Core support for method delegation
I like it! One gripe (of course)...
The proposed delegation mechanism would work via a pragma:
use delegation
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Objects : Core support for method delegation
I *want* this. Delegation is cool. Delegation that gets set up at
compile time and is marked as such and can
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Modulo some superpositional silliness,
Hey! I resemble that remark!
And we love you for it.
--
Piers
Michael Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 05:23:27PM +0200, Slaven Rezic wrote:
Often, there is the case that "my" is used before actually assigning a
value to it. For example:
my Foo $foo;
if ($cond1) {
$foo = new Foo 1, 2, 3;
} else {
"David E. Wheeler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1 Sep 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Objects : Private keys and methods
Here, here amen, Damian! This one gets my instant vote!
And
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
my Dog $spot should call a constructor implicitly
Eeeeww. Most of the time I use 'my Dog $spot' is along the lines
of:
package Dog;
sub
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
=head1 DESCRIPTION
One of the most common mistakes I make is forgetting a C; after
Cdo BLOCK, probably because I'm thinking ``if'' and an if doesn't
require a C: after it's closing C}. I'll type, for example,
$cond and do {
#
Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Eliminate bareword filehandles.
"Eliminate" is such a strong word. You're saying that we can't
use STDIN, STDOUT, STDERR, ARGV, or DATA anymore? Heck,
Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I intend to extend the parameter lists RFC to cover optional
(non-tailing) arguments.
Will this include having typed variadic functions, allowing you, for
example, to say something like
This function takes any number of arrays, all passed
Nathan Wigner, disguised as Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Gut feeling, I don't like this proposal. Examples coming up.
Increases in namespace are basically always beneficial.
=head2 Potential Problems
This approach is not without its problems. These need to be
Markus Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--On 22.08.2000 18:24 Uhr + David L. Nicol wrote:
Regardless of what its called, in a method called as a subroutine,
the variable could refer to the last instance of this kind of object
used by this thread.
Hmm Does that mean if I once
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
=item *
Changes to the semantics of Cbless so that, after associating an
object with a class, the class's CINIT methods are automatically
called on the object. An additional trailing C@ parameter for
Cbless, to allow arguments to be passed to
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why would anyone want to select a different method based upon the
arguments.
Have you seen Class::Multimethods? This kind of despatch can be very
useful. Of course, the existence of Class::Multimethods proves that it
can be
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
The $a and $b of the sort comparator were A Bad Idea to begin with.
Ditto. Can we ditch these in Perl 6? Don't see why $_[0] and $_[1] can't
be used, or even a more standard $1 and $2. Either one makes it more
obvious
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nathan Torkington wrote:
Not every subroutine corresponds to a method call exposing
object-internal data. Most of my subroutines *do* something and make
no sense to be called lvaluably. Explicit marking the compiler pick
up assignments to
"J. David Blackstone" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I find the standard prefix symbols so intuitive I find it hard to
articulate the reasons why I balk at giving them up. It's like
explaining breathing or the ability to distinguish colors.
Bravo! What he said! Hear, hear!
[FX: Waves order
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please take this discussion to the new -errors sublist. Thanks in
advance!
Exceptions are not necessarily errors. This belongs in
perl-language-flow surely?
--
Piers
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 10:59:38AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This RFC proposes that lvalue subs, when invoked as such, should receive
the rvalue being assigned to it as an argument.
I'm
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Aug 13, 2000 at 10:51:24PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
Could be. I'd be interested in seeing non-OOP proposals that do what I
want exceptions to do, I have a hard time imagining one.
Well, what is it that you want exceptions to do?
Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Leon Brocard writes:
=head2 $AUTOLOAD
While we're at it, it *may* be a good idea to remove the
global $AUTOLOAD variable and instead pass it as the first
parameter of the AUTOLOAD
Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 02:52:32AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Mike-
Jeremy's got a great explanation of this, which I'll paraphrase, but the
discussion went through lots of iterations. Think of the ^ as a carat or
thumbtack, holding the place for
Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 01:47:12PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
/^_/
What is that matching ?
We've done this. It's matching a string that begins with '_'. Which is
why, if you want to disambiguate you do /^{_}/ just like you do
John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley wrote:
The (continue|always|finally|whatever) clause will *always* be
executed, even if one of the catch clauses does a die, so you can use
this to roll back the database transaction or whatever else was going
on and restore any
John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simpler semantics and you can always ref a L(OL(OL(OL...etc.))) if you need
multidimensionals.
Combined with highlander variables, and there ceases to be a problem.
Will you stop with the highlander variables?
--
Piers
Chaim Frenkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"PC" == Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PC The (continue|always|finally|whatever) clause will *always* be
PC executed, even if one of the catch clauses does a die, so you can use
PC this to roll back the database transaction or wha
Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are the two values of a pair restricted in anyway? All your examples
were scalar.
Yes. The two components must be scalars.
The key is stringified iff it's a bareword.
Otherwise no restrictions
Nick Ing-Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 11:41:42AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
How about this?
open '/etc/passwd'; # file
OK
open '/usr/local/bin/'; # directory (note the trailing
John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Fowler wrote:
I think a stringified reference is worth seeing, moreso than a simple undef,
for debugging purposes if nothing else.
I personally would like to have the stringification of refs be a
symmetric operation, i.e. such a string
Peter Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 09:28 AM 8/8/00 +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Peter Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 12:07 AM 8/8/00 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:56:40 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
I meant that BEGIN, END, and INIT aren't declared
Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
some people have mentioned help strings as special parts of a sub
declaration like gnu lisp has. this could be more support for that type
of thing. but i don't want it to be too strange.
Hmm...
sub foo ($$;@) :lvalue
"Documentation string here"
Peter Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
=head1 TITLE
Higher order functions
Well, this should keep the Obfuscated Perl Contest going for at least
another decade :-)
Whilst still being deeply useful in non obfuscatory contexts too.
--
Piers
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Proposal to utilize C* as the prefix to magic subroutines
I freely accept that this is not anything approaching a reasoned
critique but:
Yecch!
--
"Peter Bevan" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just a thought, but I think it woul be a good idea to include the
'java-esqe' practice of including packages via foo.barr.*
or in Perl's case Foo::Bar::* (assume that the module include syntax remains
the same)...
I can see that in the case of some
Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martyn J. Pearce sent the following bits through the ether:
I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy
May I suggest that Perl6 will be a different language? I've seen the
"I use it, don't change it" argument a couple of times now and it's
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 05:31 AM 8/7/00 +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
Another one for my wish list: deep copying support built in. A devil
inside me thinks this should be a new assignment
operator. Damian? Sounds like this is up your alley. I want to do a
Perl6 RFC Librarian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
=head1 DESCRIPTION
At present Cindex only returns the index of the first occurrence of a
specified substring. It is proposed that Cindex take a fourth parameter
telling it which occurrence of a specified substring to locate:
$first =
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But it isn't "here" that's the problem. If we just wanted to change
the value "here", we could use my(). The problem is that local()
changes the value for somewhere else as well as here.
Well, as has been pointed out, special^Wlocalized
Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Porter writes:
Compilation: Remove requirement for final true value in require'd and
do'ed files
Do not. I use this feature.
Is there any reason you couldn't use "die" instead?
Is there any reason that both couldn't be used at the
Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perl's similarity to English is one of the things that makes it Fun.
OTOH, being fun (which I admit it is) is one of the reasons many
people don't want to think Perl is a serious language.
So what?
Well said.
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perl's similarity to English is one of the things that makes it Fun.
OTOH, being fun (which I admit it is) is one of the reasons many
people don't want to think Perl is a serious language.
Not saying we should eliminate all
Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
True, but maybe a lower precedance keword is needed like we did
or || and . I think someone suggested "then"
print $string1, $string2, "\n" then return 3 if $cond;
then again, maybe not.
Why not just piss everybody off?
return 3
Tom Christiansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But that, precisely, was my point: Arrays *and* hashes. If there is more than
one plural whatzitz, then why can't there be more than one singular whatzitz?
(and don't say, "because plural *means* more than one" :-). If having a
filehandle
Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Christiansen writes:
What is the purpose of ghettoizing everying cohering topic? Making
us subscribe to infinite lists to wear us down?
Yes.
If you really care about the topic, you'll join the list. If you
don't care, stay off the
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Peter Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I think -- Piers) writes:
Though a good post condition would benefit from some sort of
unconditional catch of return, I suppose. Perhaps allowing
continue on the outer sub block...
Argh, no! A good
Edwin Steiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In my opinion Perl lacks (at least partially) some features which
I consider important for scripting languages:
* elimination of pointers (If I want to spend my time considering how
many dereference operators to use I'll go for ***C++).
I'm aware,
Chaim Frenkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"CF" == Chaim Frenkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"TA" == Ted Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TA In general, they do what you want, unless you want consistency.
CF Randal, Tom, et. al.
CF How locked in to your brain is this lack of consistency?
401 - 470 of 470 matches
Mail list logo
