On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 11:27:59PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
Answering to the best of my knowledge.
On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Question #2:
Why are we storing the hypothetical's sigil in the match object?
I think it's to differentiate the different namespaces
Apologies for trying to resuscitate this old horse, but a new idea
occurred to me.
Back in October I suggested that $a ^+= b would act like reduce,
but in discussion
it was decided that it would act like length, by the interpretation:
$a ^+= b
$a = $a ^+ b
$a = ($a, $a, $a, ...)
While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
as this one to match a C float
/^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
would actually become longer:
/^([+-]?)before
# INTERNAL q, qq, qw
# XXX - how do I do quote-like operators? I know I saw someone say...
# Need to do: qr (NEVER(qr)) and qx
presumably the way the perl5 tokeniser does them - by parsing the string
into a series of concatenated constants and variables, with some optionally
fed through
On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Chuck Kulchar wrote:
Also, how do these perl6 builtins in perl6 work with the current
P6C/Builtins.pm? (also, why are some that are already defined in pure
pasm/part of the parrot core redefined as perl6 code?)
For the moment, they don't. Eventually, I expect there will
Erik Steven Harrison:
# But still, what counts as a runtime property, other than true or
# false, as in the delightful '0 but true'? What other kind of runtime
# labels can I slap on a value?
These occur to me:
$foo=0 but string(zero);
$bar='foobar' but num(1);
$baz=1
Mr. Nobody wrote:
/^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
would actually become longer:
/^([+-]?)before \d|\.\d\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
Your first expression uses capturing parens, but the captures
don't bind anything useful, so you should probably compare
non-capturing
On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Mr. Nobody wrote:
While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
as this one to match a C float
/^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
would actually
--
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:31:45
Damian Conway wrote:
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
I know that the property syntax is pseudo established,
but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the
built in properties were building. What about good ol'
aliases?
sub hidden (str $name, int
reposted because my mailer is evil
--
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:31:45
Damian Conway wrote:
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
I know that the property syntax is pseudo established,
but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the
built in properties were building. What about good ol'
--
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:26:08
Damian Conway wrote:
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
Is it just me or is the 'is' property syntax a little
too intuitive? Seems like everywhere I turn, the
proposed syntax to solve a problem is to apply a
property.
That's because most of the problems
Damian Conway wrote:
And is the is/but distinction still around?
Oh, yes.
Could someone please reference where this decision was made. I do not find
any information describing the distinction.
Steve
_
Join the worlds largest
Damian Conway wrote:
And is the is/but distinction still around?
Oh, yes.
Could someone please reference where this decision was
made. I do not find any information describing the distinction.
The following May 2001 post was related. Poke around the
thread it was in, especially posts
13 matches
Mail list logo
