Re: String Literals, take 2

2002-12-04 Thread James Mastros
On 12/03/2002 2:27 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote: I think we've been gravitating to a language reference, geared primarily towards intermediate/advanced users. Something much more rigorous than beginners would be comfortable with (since it defines things in much greater detail than beginners

Re: String Literals, take 2

2002-12-04 Thread Luke Palmer
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 18:39:27 -0500 From: James Mastros [EMAIL PROTECTED] Huh? In that case, somebody should tell Angel Faus; Numeric literals, take 3 says 0c777, and nobody disented. IIRC, in fact, nobody's descented to 0c777 since it was first suggested. Well, except Larry. I

Re: String Literals, take 2

2002-12-04 Thread Larry Wall
It's o, not c. Larry

Usage of \[oxdb] (was Re: String Literals, take 2)

2002-12-04 Thread Michael Lazzaro
We still need to verify whether we can have, in qq strings: \033 - octal (p5; deprecated but allowed in p6?) \o33 - octal (p5) \x1b - hex (p5) \d123 - decimal (?) \b1001- binary (?) and if so, if these are allowed too:

Re: Usage of \[oxdb] (was Re: String Literals, take 2)

2002-12-04 Thread Dave Whipp
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote Note that \b conflicts with backspace. I'd rather keep backspace than binary, personally; I have yet to feel the need to call out a char in binary. :-) Or we can make it dependent on the trailing digits, or require the brackets, or require backspace

Re: Usage of \[oxdb] (was Re: String Literals, take 2)

2002-12-04 Thread Larry Wall
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:38:35AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : We still need to verify whether we can have, in qq strings: : :\033 - octal (p5; deprecated but allowed in p6?) I think it's disallowed. :\o33 - octal (p5) :\x1b - hex (p5) :

Re: Usage of \[oxdb] (was Re: String Literals, take 2)

2002-12-04 Thread Damian Conway
Larry wrote: : But I think we'd definitely like to introduce \d. Can't, unless we change \d to digit in regexen. Which we ought to be very wary of, given how very frequently it's used in regexes. Damian

Re: Usage of \[oxdb]

2002-12-04 Thread Michael Lazzaro
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 12:21 PM, Larry Wall wrote: I think the general form is: \0o33 - octal \0x1b - hex \0d123 - decimal \0b1001- binary \x and \o are then just shortcuts. snip The general form could be \0o[33] - octal \0x[1b] -

RE: Usage of \[oxdb]

2002-12-04 Thread David Whipp
I think that solves all the problems we're having. We change \c to have more flexible meanings, with \0o, \0x, \0d, \0b, \o, \x as shortcuts. Boom, we're done. Thanks! How far can we go with this \c thing? How about: print \c[72, 101, 108, 108, 111]; will that print Hello? Dave.

Re: Usage of \[oxdb]

2002-12-04 Thread Michael Lazzaro
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 11:50 AM, Dave Whipp wrote: ps. how did this thread migrate from p6d to p6l? By popular request. If we have something we think will be even remotely controversial, we'll move it to p6l for debate, then use p6d to summarize the outcome. That will

purge: opposite of grep

2002-12-04 Thread Miko O'Sullivan
SUMMARY Proposal for the purge command as the opposite of grep in the same way that unless is the opposite of if. DETAILS I've lately been going a lot of greps in which I want to keep all the elements in an array that do *not* match some rule. For example, suppose I have a list of members of a

RE: purge: opposite of grep

2002-12-04 Thread David Whipp
Miko O'Sullivan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: SUMMARY Proposal for the purge command as the opposite of grep in the same way that unless is the opposite of if. I like it. But reading it reminded me of another common thing I do with grep: partitioning a list into equivalence classes.

Re: seperate() and/or Array.cull

2002-12-04 Thread Luke Palmer
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 18:26:17 -0800 From: Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Disposition: inline Sender: Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/ (The post about 'purge'

Re: seperate() and/or Array.cull

2002-12-04 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 08:08:48PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote: About your idea, though, I'm rather indifferent. However, a friend of mine once asked me if Perl had search or find operation, returning the Iindex of matching elements. Now am I just being braindead, or is Perl actually missing

Re: seperate() and/or Array.cull

2002-12-04 Thread Luke Palmer
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 19:21:27 -0800 From: Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 08:08:48PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote: About your idea, though, I'm rather indifferent. However, a friend of mine once asked me if Perl had search or find operation, returning the Iindex

Re: purge: opposite of grep

2002-12-04 Thread John Williams
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Miko O'Sullivan wrote: FWIW, I came up with purge because my first inclination was to spell grep backwards: perg. :-) While purge is cute, it certainly is not obvious what it does. Of course neither is grep unless you are an aging unix guru... How about something which