On Sat, 07 May 2005 01:47:08 -0400, Matt Creenan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So here's some random ideas that probably make no sense ($ can be
optional.. don't know)
*snip*
That brings me to another idea. Is $_ as an array used? @_?
This relates back to the discussion on topics. Could be use @_
Mark A. Biggar skribis 2005-05-06 22:12 (-0700):
Actually if we define |...| at all, I'd prefer it mean abs(), its usual
mathmatical meaning.
No. We can't just use circumfix |...| with arbitrary expressions in it,
because | is taken as an infix operator. It has to be quoteish (like
(this is
Matt Creenan skribis 2005-05-07 1:47 (-0400):
I thought about $blockname = { ... }, but = is obviously taken, as is ==
$blockname =: for 1..5 {
$blockname := for 1..5 {
} $blockname;
} =: $blockname;
} $blockname;
$blockname for 1..5 {
$blockname
Matt Creenan skribis 2005-05-07 4:14 (-0400):
That brings me to another idea. Is $_ as an array used? @_?
The default signature of subs is ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
On 5/6/05, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The question is whether to treat the left arg the same way we treat
attribute defaults, with one free closure call. We could say that
{ rand 10 } x 100
{ rand 10 } xx 100
should just automatically call the closure on the left
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 02:23:15PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Matt Creenan skribis 2005-05-07 1:47 (-0400):
: I thought about $blockname = { ... }, but = is obviously taken, as is ==
: $blockname =: for 1..5 {
: $blockname := for 1..5 {
: } $blockname;
: } =: $blockname;
: }
To try and make it easier to pick (ASCII) operators, a simple table of
what's given away and what's available. Please let me know if there are
any mistakes.
If anyone knows how to fill in the ??? parts, be my guest!
\W+ Term (pre|circ) Operator (post|in)
`AVAILABLE
On 5/6/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To try and make it easier to pick (ASCII) operators, a simple table of
what's given away and what's available. Please let me know if there are
any mistakes.
Thanks! Here's an annotated bit for each ?.
If anyone knows how to fill in the ??? parts, be
Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
Thanks! Here's an annotated bit for each ?.
Only the triple-questionmarks were meant as questions. I should have
picked a better meta-operator for AVAILABLE?. But apparently, even
though I didn't mean to ask so many questions, there still are
On 5/6/05, Juerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
!not none() ???
Nope. In order to create those, you just need to say none(). There
is no operator form.
Do we have postfix ! for factorials, or is it available?
No, it's
Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 11:04 (-0600):
Because we're marking all of our singular nouns with $, and you have
to admit, the $ sigil in perl code is much more common than @ and %.
What good is a noun marker if you mark some of your verbs with it too?
But verbing doesn't weird language at
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 06:24:00PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
To try and make it easier to pick (ASCII) operators, a simple table of
what's given away and what's available. Please let me know if there are
any mistakes.
If anyone knows how to fill in the ??? parts, be my guest!
[...]
\w+
Patrick R. Michaud skribis 2005-05-06 12:20 (-0500):
Ummm, what about Cnot and Ctrue ?
I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the
I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the difference.
Is it prefix:not or just not? I have no idea. I do know that it's
infix:x, not x.
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:31:43PM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
: single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
: help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the difference.
: Is it
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 06:49:44PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
: Why the %!@ would you ignore that!? :-)
:
: I hate my brain. Now I wonder if Bool.does(Hash). Does it? :)
Any Object does Hash, and treats any argumentless method as a potential
hash key.
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:25:31AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: Any Object does Hash, and treats any argumentless method as a potential
: hash key.
I should also point out that the main reason for this is to allow
easier translation of Perl 5 idioms to Perl 6 without having to guess
whether $foo
Juerd skribis 2005-05-06 18:24 (+0200):
|AVAILABLE any()
We can use this for labels:
|foo| for ... {
while ... {
...;
next foo if ...;
}
}
It'll confuse the heck out of Ruby coders, but I do like this syntax. It
makes labels
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:43:07AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: :: namespace ternary
:
: That's class sigil in term position. Separating namespaces never
: have preceding whitespace, so they're always part of some larger term.
Really more like a package sigil, which can be
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 06:24:00PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: {} href|closure hash (deref+)subscript (no ws)
: {}? (clash) AVAILABLE (ws)
s/AVAILABLE/statement block/
Actually, I'd try to find a way to combine all the paired ws-dependent
entries onto the same
Larry Wall skribis 2005-05-06 18:22 (-0700):
(But then you need to put postfix first in the heading.)
The heading uses junctions, and junctions are unordered ;)
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
Juerd wrote:
Juerd skribis 2005-05-06 18:24 (+0200):
|AVAILABLE any()
We can use this for labels:
|foo| for ... {
while ... {
...;
next foo if ...;
}
}
It'll confuse the heck out of Ruby coders, but I do like this syntax. It
makes
On Sat, 07 May 2005 01:12:02 -0400, Mark A. Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually if we define |...| at all, I'd prefer it mean abs(), its usual
mathmatical meaning.
I agree. I think || is just confusing.
I thought about $blockname = { ... }, but = is obviously taken, as is ==
So here's
23 matches
Mail list logo
