On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 08:55:28PM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: The text of S02, S03, and S04 still contain references to the
: now-defunct statement_modifier grammatical category.
Yes, there are several similar issues that need to be cleared up
as soon as
Larry Wall wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: : Finally: when used as a statement modifier, is given considered to
: : be conditional or looping? (Gut instinct: conditional.)
:
: Why does it have to be one or the other? It's just a topicalizer.
:
: One implication of replacing
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 06:01:48PM -0700, Dave Whipp wrote:
: The following is legal perl:
:
: print $a $b $c if ($a,$b,$c)=(1,2,3);
:
: This prints 1 2 3, but the definitions obviously aren't scoped to the
: modified statement. And a Cmy in the modifier is a bit too late.
:
: Any reason to
On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 08:53:23PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
How is a left-associative operator less special than a non-associative
one?
Ehm, most operators in perl are left-associative, so you probably mean R2L
short-circuiting but even then I'm not sure what you're trying to say here
And you
To save people from having to re-read the thread, here is the actual
proposal in detail again:
PROPOSAL
Replace the 'if', 'unless', 'when' statement modifiers by identically
named lowest-precedence left-associative operators that short-circuit
from right to left.
This means
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luke Palmer) writes:
we have a definitive
^^
Remember that this is Perl 6. You keep using that word, etc.
--
void russian_roulette(void) { char *target; strcpy(target, bullet); }
Simon Cozens:
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luke Palmer) writes:
# we have a definitive
# ^^
# Remember that this is Perl 6. You keep using that word, etc.
It *is* definitive, Simon...at least this week. ;^)
--Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@roles=map {Parrot $_} qw(embedding regexen
--- Matthijs van Duin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now the real subject.. has the issue of multiple statement modifiers
already been settled? I saw some mention it wasn't going to be
supported, but also mentions of how it would be useful; I can think
of such a situation myself:
.method when
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 08:20:39AM -0800, Paul wrote:
The real nightmare tends to show up when you duplicate a modifier.
What does
.method given $x given $y; # which object's .method is called?
mean? It gets worse below
I made a mistake in my original post, they definitely need to be left-
PROPOSAL
Replace the 'if', 'unless', 'when' statement modifiers by identically
named lowest-precedence left-associative operators that short-circuit
from right to left.
This means 'FOO if BAR' is identical to 'BAR and FOO', except it has a
lower precedence, and 'FOO unless
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 01:14:05PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
It is nice to see someone who puts as much thought into posting as you
do. Unfortunately, your proposal is moot, as we have a definitive
No, still can't chain them from Larry.
11 matches
Mail list logo
