On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:54:13PM -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 08:56:33PM -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 10:07:55PM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
Uhm, I'm sorry, but that's not good enough. You cannot distinguish
between Windows 95/98/ME
On Sun, Jan 28, 2001 at 11:07:10PM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Jarkko Hietaniemi writes:
True, but you can't do any of all that without knowing the platform
accurately (nontrivial and requires core mod or XS). Once that's
done, the rest is just a matter of extending File::Spec
Uri Guttman wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why does it work that way?
people wanted access the the actual values of a hash when doing
foreach ( values %hash )
so they can mung them.
Yes; but the question isn't really "why", it's "how".
Apparently chop() is specialized internally
J. David Blackstone wrote:
Yeah, that was one of my disappointments when I finally made the
Java plunge last month. I kind of expected integers to be objects in
what I had heard was the "perfect, pure" OO language.
Everybody seems to be missing the fact that jwz bitching about Java's
"32 bit
Jeanna FOx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everybody seems to be missing the fact that jwz bitching about Java's
"32 bit non-object ints" means that at least he thinks they could be
salvaged. What would he think of Perl's "224 bit non-object ints"?!
Don't get smug because Perl can iterate over an
Jarkko Hietaniemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The desire to know the name of the runtime platform is a misdirected
desire.
What you really want to know is whether function Foo will be there,
what
kind of signature it has, whether file Bar will be there, what kind of
format it has, and so
"JP" == John Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JP Yes; but the question isn't really "why", it's "how".
JP Apparently chop() is specialized internally to detect the
JP hashness of its argument, in a way that can't be expressed
JP by a prototype.
well, according to this
perl5.6.0 -le
Jeanna FOx wrote:
Everybody seems to be missing the fact that jwz bitching about Java's
"32 bit non-object ints" means that at least he thinks they could be
salvaged. What would he think of Perl's "224 bit non-object ints"?!
Don't get smug because Perl can iterate over an array of anything.
Perhaps you meant that Perl 6 is going to have homogeneous arrays, in
which case an array of ints would keep 32 bits (per value) of int data in
the array and auto-generate the extra flags and stuff when a value is
extracted from the array. That's possible, but it's a special case of small
David Mitchell wrote:
Jeanna FOx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everybody seems to be missing the fact that jwz bitching about Java's
"32 bit non-object ints" means that at least he thinks they could be
salvaged. What would he think of Perl's "224 bit non-object ints"?!
Don't get smug because
Jeanna FOx wrote:
It also looks like some features are impossible to turn off -- like the
mandatory locking that jwz hates about Java. It's not safe to turn it
off, but it's not really safe with it on either. Some people would rather
loose the illusion of safety to get better performance.
At 12:20 PM 1/29/2001 -0500, Jeanna FOx wrote:
David Mitchell wrote:
Jeanna FOx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everybody seems to be missing the fact that jwz bitching about Java's
"32 bit non-object ints" means that at least he thinks they could be
salvaged. What would he think of Perl's
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:39:42AM -0500, John Porter wrote:
Uri Guttman wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why does it work that way?
people wanted access the the actual values of a hash when doing
foreach ( values %hash )
so they can mung them.
Yes; but the question isn't
where are all RFCs posted for perl6?
is this the main discussion board for perl6
development, or has the development broken down
into separate group-lists? if it's broken down,
where would i find a listing of lists?
thanks much,
Mark Koopman
Software Engineer
WebSideStory, Inc
10182
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:47:47 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
well, according to this
perl5.6.0 -le '%h = qw( a b c d ); $_ .= 1 for %h ; print values %h ; chop %h ; print
values %h'
b1d1
bd
it doesn't appear to be a chop specific thing. unraveling a hash always
seems to use aliases for the values.
: Jeanna FOx wrote:
: It also looks like some features are impossible to turn off -- like the
: mandatory locking that jwz hates about Java. It's not safe to turn it
: off, but it's not really safe with it on either. Some people would rather
: loose the illusion of safety to get better
I didn't post up jwz's grumblings to kick off Yet Another Java vs Perl
Argument. Nor did I post it to point out that he's a curmudgeonly
young fart (which he is, but that's not a Bad Thing). Its there
because he made alot of good points which apply to Perl.
Keep the discussion focused there,
At 12:54 PM 1/29/2001 -0800, Thomas Butler wrote:
: Jeanna FOx wrote:
: It also looks like some features are impossible to turn off -- like the
: mandatory locking that jwz hates about Java. It's not safe to turn it
: off, but it's not really safe with it on either. Some people would rather
:
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:37:22AM -0800, Mark Koopman wrote:
where are all RFCs posted for perl6?
is this the main discussion board for perl6
development, or has the development broken down
into separate group-lists? if it's broken down,
where would i find a listing of lists?
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:39:42AM -0500, John Porter wrote:
Yes; but the question isn't really "why", it's "how".
Apparently chop() is specialized internally to detect the
hashness of its argument, in a way that can't be expressed
by a prototype.
That's what I thought, but no. The hash
"Branden" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Of course, C++ has no GC, which is a good thing, but you can always
fake it with Refcounts, which is much more efficient, and easily
feasable with C++.
Err... current research shows that the refcount approach is one of the
slowest forms of GC, and it
21 matches
Mail list logo
