On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 09:29:21AM -0400, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
Wouldn't Know a Tagmemic if it Bit Him on the Parse
Ooh, can I steal that as a title? (Though I'll s/Tagmemic/Tagmeme/.) I
like it! :)
Allison
Wouldn't Know a Tagmemic if it Bit Him on the Parse
Ooh, can I steal that as a title? (Though I'll s/Tagmemic/Tagmeme/.) I
like it! :)
You got it!
I hope this isn't too off topic, but... is the word tagmeme somehow
related to the urban legend concept of a cultural meme?
-Miko
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:24:13PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
So the main reason that objects can function as hashes is so that the
user can poke an object into an interface expecting a hash and have it
make sense, to the extent that the object is willing to be viewed like
that.
AKA the
In this example:
%hash = ($a=$b);
$a can be anything. In fact, since Perl6 promises to retain the original
value of $a, we're rather encouraged to store complex data there. But,
this poses a problem. The key to use for hashing might not ideally be
the string representation.
For
Aaron Sherman writes:
: In this example:
:
: %hash = ($a=$b);
:
: $a can be anything. In fact, since Perl6 promises to retain the original
: value of $a, we're rather encouraged to store complex data there. But,
: this poses a problem. The key to use for hashing might not ideally be
: the
Miko O'Sullivan writes:
: Wouldn't Know a Tagmemic if it Bit Him on the Parse
:
: Ooh, can I steal that as a title? (Though I'll s/Tagmemic/Tagmeme/.) I
: like it! :)
:
: You got it!
:
: I hope this isn't too off topic, but... is the word tagmeme somehow
: related to the urban legend
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 09:34:36 -0700 (PDT), Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pike predates Dawkins, who I believe made up the term.
(Could be wrong about that.) They are similar concepts, however, in
that a tagmeme is a psychological linguistic construct that propagates
culturally. It's
Speaking of which, how do we ensure the immutability of keys being put
into the hash? I think Perl copied the string, so that:
$b = aa;
$a{$b} = 1;
chop $b;
print $a{aa};
still works.
If we start storing full thingies into the keys of a hash, we either need
to make deep copies of these, or
On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 14:00, Mike Lambert wrote:
Speaking of which, how do we ensure the immutability of keys being put
into the hash? I think Perl copied the string, so that:
$b = aa;
$a{$b} = 1;
chop $b;
print $a{aa};
still works.
If we start storing full thingies into the keys of
Andy Wardley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:24:13PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
So the main reason that objects can function as hashes is so that the
user can poke an object into an interface expecting a hash and have it
make sense, to the extent that the object is willing
Also known as constructs you wish you hadn't discovered.
So, I'm reading through Finkel and I came across the following, which
computes the greatest common divisor of a and b (recast into perl6ish
syntax)
while {
when $a $b { $b -= $a }
when $b $a { $a -= $b }
}
The idea is that
On 4/16/02 11:00 AM, Mike Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
Speaking of which, how do we ensure the immutability of keys being put
into the hash? I think Perl copied the string, so that:
$b = aa;
$a{$b} = 1;
chop $b;
print $a{aa};
still works.
If we start storing full thingies
On 4/16/02 11:57 AM, Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
Personally I'd like the default hash to return some immutable, unique
and probably opaque object id (something the like
'Foo=HASH(0x81e2a3c)' you get from unoverloaded objects in Perl5, but
probably not identical). This isn't going
Piers Cawley writes:
: Also known as constructs you wish you hadn't discovered.
:
: So, I'm reading through Finkel and I came across the following, which
: computes the greatest common divisor of a and b (recast into perl6ish
: syntax)
:
: while {
: when $a $b { $b -= $a }
: when $b
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 02:00:33PM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
Speaking of which, how do we ensure the immutability of keys being put
into the hash? I think Perl copied the string, so that:
RFC266 talks about these issues, though it was just really my take on
the problem at the time.
Buddha Buck writes:
: It's weirder when you allow multiple guard conditions to be true with no
: guarantee of evaluation order. But I see no reason to disallow it.
Well, Perl would guarantee the order. I can see situations where it'd
be better to force a random pick to avoid starvation
Piers Cawley writes:
: Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 14:00, Mike Lambert wrote:
: Speaking of which, how do we ensure the immutability of keys being put
: into the hash? I think Perl copied the string, so that:
:
: $b = aa;
: $a{$b} = 1;
: chop $b;
:
On 4/16/02 12:27 PM, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
You guys are thinking in terms of a single $obj.hash method. I think
there will be more than one hashish (er...) method available, and each
hash will be able to choose at least whether it wants to hash by $obj._
(the default), by
Piers Cawley writes:
: Andy Wardley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Hang on, now I'm a little confused - I thought that hashes were supposed
: to keep their % sigil. So shouldn't that be %foo.keys or %foo.{keys}?
: But then that would then violate the uniform access principle because
: hash/key
David Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 4/16/02 11:57 AM, Piers Cawley [EMAIL PROTECTED] claimed:
Personally I'd like the default hash to return some immutable, unique
and probably opaque object id (something the like
'Foo=HASH(0x81e2a3c)' you get from unoverloaded objects in Perl5, but
On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 14:57, Piers Cawley wrote:
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I suspect it would involve:
1. Copying the key (which might be a reference) on insertion.
2. Hashing once, and caching the hash.
This means a minimum of overhead, so it's a good thing. It also
Juanma Barranquero wrote:
On _THE SELFISH GENE_ Dawkins says he coined the term, which was a more
euphonic version of mimeme:
On quickly scanning that message I read the last word as mini-me, which
brought up some *very* unlikely associations! :-)
Damian
--
So, Mr. Evil...
It's Dr. Evil, I
In Exegesis 4, Damian writes:
blockquote
It's important to note that writing:
for @a; @b - $x; $y {...}
# in parallel, iterate @a one-at-a-time as $x, and @b one-at-a-time as
$y
is not the same as writing:
for @a, @b - $x, $y {...}
# sequentially iterate @a then @b,
Now, I love that the for loop can do both of these things, but the subtlety
of the difference in syntax is likely, IMO, to lead to very difficult-
to-find bugs. It's very easy to miss that I've used a comma when I meant to
use a semicolon, and vice versa. And what's the mnemonic again?
Well,
It was the dawning of the second age of parrotkind, ten weeks after
the great GC war. The Parrot Project was a dream given form. Its goal:
To prevent language wars by creating an interpreter where perl and other
languages could reside peacefully... It can be a dangerous place, but
it's our last
25 matches
Mail list logo
