On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:11:34 -0400, BÁRTHÁZI András [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
I just would like to share it with you. We had a weekend at the lake
Balaton on the last weekend, where I had a talk about Perl 6. The guys
liked it (the girls had sunbath during the event :), and one of them
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Of course, there are other implicit parameters that are given
to a rule -- the target string to be matched and an initial
starting position. But I think some of those details are still
being worked out.
Wasn't it said that rules have the current match object/state
Rob Kinyon wrote:
xOn 5/31/05, Sam Vilain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob Kinyon wrote:
I would love to see a document (one per editor) that describes the
Unicode characters in use and how to make them. The Set implementation
in Pugs uses (at last count) 20 different Unicode characters as
On 6/1/05, Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should {} be an empty hash rather than an empty code?
Given that an empty hashref is probably much more useful than an empty
block, I propose that {} be an empty hash and {;} be an empty block.
This mirrors the fact that (AFAIK) { $_ = 1 } is a
Luke Palmer wrote:
Should {} be an empty hash rather than an empty code?
Does it matter? More interesting is the question what it returns
or evaluates to if it's a block. Actually with my idea of List
beeing a subtype of Code the parse time recognition of blocks
as List of Pair has no
On 6/2/05, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luke Palmer wrote:
Why did we change { %hash } from making a shallow copy of a hash to
the code that returns %hash?
Sorry, I don't understand this question. Do you want 'shallow copy'
to mean 'take a ref'? Or Parrot/Pugs level COW?
All:
I would like to revisit the following question as there was no
decision reached AFAICT.
http://groups.google.ca/group/perl.perl6.language/browse_thread/thread/766c1b32c57a56f6/3296f0d6cad75548?q=list+context+.charsrnum=1hl=en#3296f0d6cad75548
What I would like to be able to do is:
my $str
So, if we continue following this API, Perl6 core will contain time(),
but no localtime() nor gmtime(). The Date module will provide human
readable date and time strings, and basic date math.
localtime() and gmtime() seem fairly core to me. The array contexts are
simple, and the scalar
Paul Seamons skribis 2005-06-02 9:43 (-0600):
localtime() and gmtime() seem fairly core to me. The array contexts are
simple, and the scalar context is an RFC valid string. Nothing too heavy
s/array context/list context/
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 09:14:33AM +0200, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Of course, there are other implicit parameters that are given
to a rule -- the target string to be matched and an initial
starting position. But I think some of those details are still
being
Luke Palmer wrote:
When we heard that Larry didn't acutally want $$foo to infinitely
dereference, some of us were overjoyed, and others severely
disappointed. Both transparent dereferencing (infinite $$foo) and
opaque dereferencing (one-level $$foo) have their uses, but they are
definitely
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) skribis 2005-06-02 20:36 (+0200):
Might it be applicable to use .() as the dereferencer
of scalar variables that derefs to the next none(Ref)
type and if that is a Code it dispatches to it as expected?
Or perhaps postfix $, to deref recursively.
my $foo = 5;
my
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Alas, it doesn't seem to be quite that straightforward. Or maybe
it is, and I'm just not seeing it yet. So, I'll just think out
loud here for a bit...
I like it if that is happening on the list instead of off-list.
Thanks.
I think the state object ought to have
Juerd wrote:
$y() = 7;
No, sorry, that looks to me as if $y is a reference to an lvalue sub,
not like any form of referencing of scalars.
Well, it is a reference to an lvalue sub if it is just that :)
As unspecificly typed as it stands there it could be anything
that reacts to postfix:()
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) skribis 2005-06-02 21:30 (+0200):
And it nicely lines up with $y[], $y{}, @a[], %h{} etc. as
dereferential expressions.
Except that () doesn't return a reference to an anonymous scalar of the
list it surrounds.
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
HaloO Juerd,
you wrote:
Except that () doesn't return a reference to an anonymous scalar of the
list it surrounds.
Of course not. The inside of the .() call operator has type
Signature and the dispatch goes to the implementation that has
the closest type distance to the types of the actual
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) skribis 2005-06-02 22:22 (+0200):
The only thing that is a bit unclear to me is if the dot is part of the
operator name---like a sigil---or purely syntactical. A method is e.g.
also not defined with the dot:
class Blahh
{
method .example ( $non_invocant ) {...}
}
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 10:45:45PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
If we allow sub .foo, sub :foo comes naturally, and another
asymmetry is gone.
It would also allow multi sub and multi method to simply become
multi.
I _really_ like the explicit 'method' name that methods have. Calling
them subs
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 09:19:22PM +0200, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
I think the state object ought to have some sort of base type --
is it Grammar? Rule? If we say it's a Rule, then we're
effectively saying that applying a Rule to a target results
in a Rule object containing the state
19 matches
Mail list logo
