Not a comment at all on it? Was I accidentally unsubscribed to
perl6-language?
*tap* *tap* is this thing on?
Nat
I think we were all just stunned by the sheer brilliance. :^) That package
thing is pretty damn clever...
--Brent Dax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This e-mail is a circumvention device as defined by the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act.
#qrpff
Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not a comment at all on it? Was I accidentally unsubscribed to
perl6-language?
*tap* *tap* is this thing on?
Using module/class instead of package is exactly the same route that LaTeX
took in the transition from 2.09 to 2e. It works quite well,
Piers Cawley wrote:
be "If it's a word for a concept we don't
actually have a word for, and it's not a complete and utter bastard to
pronounce/spell then nick it."
s/not//;
s/nick/bastardize/;
:-)
--
John Porter
In his Apoc, he talks about thrashing, and not being able to get his brain around
things.
I'm dealing with that now. Give me a little more time to divide it into smaller
portions and chew it up.
JJ
* Nathan Torkington ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010405 02:50]:
Not a comment at all on it? Was I
I tried to comment on "apocalypse" in Larry's most likely sense, but there
was a mail flub (now corrected).
Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq away
from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
revealing that which was previously unseen or
At 11:46 PM 4/4/01 -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Not a comment at all on it? Was I accidentally unsubscribed to
perl6-language?
*tap* *tap* is this thing on?
Some of us got to reading Damian's design for Perl 5+i which was announced
at the same time and are suffering from blown minds after
All I could think was, "good thing the 3rd Camel came out before Larry
used it to classify RFCs." :)
I am glad RFC 141 was rejected, even if Larry claims it was for
entertainment value. For the same reason people feel the need to explain
the use of "apocalypse", the design of Perl 6 should not
Peter Scott wrote:
Some of us got to reading Damian's design for Perl 5+i which was announced
at the same time and are suffering from blown minds after learning how fast
he wrote the thing.
Consider how blown his mind is after WRITING it :-)
Oh, and who put him up to that, eh?
I'm sure I'd
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 12:28:34PM -0600, Dan Brian wrote:
I was very glad to see Larry address RFC 28 in the way he did; this will
be quoted often in the future, both concerning being "needlessly fearful"
of Perl adopting a different language paradigm, as well as the "essence"
of Perl being
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:42:23AM +, David Grove wrote:
Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq away
from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
revealing that which was previously unseen or unheard, hidden behind a
veil of worlds or
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 12:15:19PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
That is, every
Perl 6 program begins with "module main". Maybe there's a better way to
implement this? ("use 6.0" has much the same problem)
"IDENTIFICATION DIVISION"
--
DISCLAIMER:
Use of this advanced computing technology does
Title: http://dev.perl.org/rfc/73.html
[25]RFC 73: All Perl core functions should return objects
[...]
I'm thinking that the solution is better abstract type support
for data values that happen to be represented internally by C
structs. We get bogged down when we try to translate
At 08:25 PM 4/5/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 12:15:19PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
That is, every
Perl 6 program begins with "module main". Maybe there's a better way to
implement this? ("use 6.0" has much the same problem)
"IDENTIFICATION DIVISION"
For some
At 12:15 PM 4/5/2001 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
1. Breaking @foo vs. $foo[]
This is interesting, and in my gut I like it. Many people I've worked
with end up writing:
@foo[0]
Which works. But then, they're completely confused by why:
%foo{key}
Doesn't.
Or why
@foo[0] = BAR;
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 03:50:04PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
(We could even make
perl 5 completely OO if you wanted to write some code for the
SCALAR/HASH/ARRAY packages. Presumably in C, if you wanted to do:
$foo = "12";
print $foo-POK;
to retrieve the POK flag, say.)
Guh.
At 08:54 PM 4/5/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 03:50:04PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
(We could even make
perl 5 completely OO if you wanted to write some code for the
SCALAR/HASH/ARRAY packages. Presumably in C, if you wanted to do:
$foo = "12";
print
Whoa. This is so simple yet so sublime. It solves so many issues in one
swoop. Cool.
Assuming Perl6 will be parsing Perl5 code? Hmmm. That's interesting.
Forget p52p6 and the whole 80/20 thing, we could potentially hit the
100% mark.
I'd really rather not, and I don't think that was
Nathan Torkington wrote:
Not a comment at all on it? Was I accidentally unsubscribed to
perl6-language?
*tap* *tap* is this thing on?
Nat
Yes, well, my first impulse was to reply, making appropriate "Wow,
that's cool" type of remarks, and then I decided to let it sink in a few
days, and
And what would be a better way of testing this out than being able to
make perl6 parse and run perl5 code correctly? (and I think that a key component
ways of making this workable would be to promote a descendent of
Parse::RecDescent to be the mechanism that parses perl for *real* and is
Thus it was written in the epistle of Michael G Schwern,
I think he's saying that its annoying to have to write any sort of tag
that says "Hey, I'm starting a new Perl 6 program here!" at the top of
every single program, much in the same way its tiresome to write "int
main(...)" in every C
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 10:10:47PM +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I think he's saying that its annoying to have to write any sort of tag
that says "Hey, I'm starting a new Perl 6 program here!" at the top of
every single program, much in the same way its tiresome to write "int
main(...)" in
Glenn Linderman wrote:
New RFC ideas?
Please, dear God, no. :-)
Nat
From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 10:10:47PM +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I think he's saying that its annoying to have to write any
sort of tag that says "Hey, I'm starting a new Perl 6 program
here!" at the top of every single program, much in
Ted Ashton wrote:
Thus it was written in the epistle of Michael G Schwern,
I think [Nate]'s saying that its annoying to have to write any tag
that says "Hey, I'm starting a new Perl 6 program here!" at the top of
every single program, much in the same way its tiresome to write "int
Ted Ashton wrote:
Perhaps it could be
1) If the code uses "module" or
2) If the executable called ends in 6.
Huh? -- perl4.036
--
John Porter
Glenn Linderman wrote:
Then it might be easier to write modules that are testable without a test
driver. If you run the module directly, some distinguished block of code
could be executed that wouldn't be if the module were "included" via
"require" or "use" (or similar replacement
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 05:15:56PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
2) If the executable called ends in 6.
ETOOMAGICAL. Shades of zip/unzip here. On some systems zip and unzip
are just hard links to the same binary. It figures out what it
supposed to do by what name is called. Very magical.
Nathan Wiger wrote:
the more compatible
with Perl5 Perl6 is, the more likely it is to be accepted.
I don't believe that's necessarily true.
If Perl6 proves to be a significantly better Perl than Perl5,
people will adopt it, especially if they're inclined toward
the Perl philosophy anyway. (And
One-liners run on a Perl 6 binary should just be Perl 6 code. Do we
really have to worry about backwards compatibility with one liners?
Hmm... programs that have perl one-liners inside them might be
troublesome.
Why not:
perl -e 'perl 5 one-liner'
perl --cmd 'perl 6 one-liner'
i.e.
Michael G Schwern wrote:
ETOOMAGICAL. Shades of zip/unzip here. On some systems zip and unzip
are just hard links to the same binary. It figures out what it
supposed to do by what name is called. Very magical. Very bad.
Well, the proposed trick for perl would be bad; what zip does
isn't.
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 11:46:12PM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Not a comment at all on it? Was I accidentally unsubscribed to
perl6-language?
*tap* *tap* is this thing on?
Nat
Me, I've been racking my brain to figure out whether Damian is Famine,
War, Plague, or Death...
--
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:42:23AM +, David Grove wrote:
Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq
away
from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
revealing that which was previously
Okay, you want comments, I got yer comments...
I am, naturally, most interested in this part:
[24]RFC 16: Keep default Perl free of constraints such as warnings and
strict.
(Keep the groans to a dull roar, please.)
To me, one of the overriding issues is whether it's possible to
At 02:43 PM 4/5/2001 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Yep, something like this would be cool. But as Dan suggested we'll
probably have to let Larry clarify his intent here.
Somewhere or other Larry talked about this. Might've been in LA1, might've
been somewhere else.
I read it as "it
would be cool
At 01:33 PM 4/5/2001 -0700, Edward Peschko wrote:
Whoa. This is so simple yet so sublime. It solves so many issues in one
swoop. Cool.
Assuming Perl6 will be parsing Perl5 code? Hmmm. That's interesting.
Forget p52p6 and the whole 80/20 thing, we could potentially hit the
100% mark.
OK, there's probably somthing simple I'm missing here, but...
1. Cuse 5 or Cuse 6 (and, in general, Cuse vervect) import the
definitions of the language as it existed at that time (more or less), or
die if they can't. (Or run through p52p6, or whatever.)
Advantage: matches existing
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 06:12:30PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
ETOOMAGICAL. Shades of zip/unzip here. On some systems zip and unzip
are just hard links to the same binary. It figures out what it
supposed to do by what name is called. Very magical. Very bad.
And what would be a better way of testing this out than being able to
make perl6 parse and run perl5 code correctly?
Well, I think it'd be easier to write a proper C parser for perl. Or an APL
one. Heck, depending on what Larry does a Forth one might be easier. Perl 5
has a *lot* of
"Nathan" == Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nathan This is interesting, and in my gut I like it. Many people I've worked
Nathan with end up writing:
Nathan@foo[0]
Nathan Which works.
"Works", for some odd meaning of the word "works". Ever try this:
@foo[0] = STDIN;
and
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, A. C. Yardley wrote:
16 bdb Keep default Perl free of constraints such as warnings and strict.
73 adb All Perl core functions should return objects
^
[...]
I might at some point add a ``d'' for Deferred, if I really think it's
too
41 matches
Mail list logo
