Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:57:56 -0800 (PST)
From: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's not a problem with builtins, but what about
sub foo ();
sub prefix:foo ($x);
@a = [foo][1,2,3,4,5];
So how is this interpreted? Such syntactic ambiguity isn't nice.
Should we go with the
Brian Ingerson wrote:
Not quite. You also need to discriminate the *type* of the superposition:
Oh right. I was thinking that Cany and friends were operations, not types.
Oops.
YAML type-URIs are made up of a type-family with an optional format:
!domain.com/type#format
and:
!int
Buddha Buck wrote:
I was wondering...
How persistant are superpositions? How pervasive are they?
As I mentioned in a recent post, would expect them to be all-pervasive
and fully propagating.
I mean, will the following work?
I would certainly hope so! (modulo the syntax snafu)
In fact,
On Tuesday, October 29, 2002, at 01:50 PM, Damian Conway wrote:
PS: Is anyone collecting these examples. It would make writing that
perl.com
article much easier for me ;-)
But of course! Piers is summarizing this entire thread -- right,
Piers? :-)
Aaron Crane wrote:
x [+]= y;
I
On 30/10/02 08:36 +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
Brian Ingerson wrote:
Speaking of persistence, I just realized I'll need to start thinking about
YAML serializations of superpositions. My first cut at it would be:
---
letters: !super [0, 1, 2]
digits: !super
- 0
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
:x [+]= y;
:
: I guess that's OK looking, tho either is fine with me.
My only syntactic quibble with [+] is that it's officially ambiguous
when it's a unary operator:
a = [+]b
could also be the start of
a = [+1, +2, +3]
Or worse:
