Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Dave Whipp
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: These lines all declare @a to be an array that stores ints. That would imply that the is Array part is actually instantiating (Cnewing) the array... you're not saying that @a can someday hold an array obj, you're saying it already _is_ an array

Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 9:30 AM + 1/7/03, Simon Cozens wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes: Well, you'll certainly be able to use delegation to get in the way if nothing else. Beyond that I'm not sure, but anything that's not based on the parrot Object PMC (which we've not quite yet defined) won't

Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Simon Cozens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes: The short answer, I suppose, is that we're not recreating Smalltalk--at least some small nod is being made towards Practicality. I really don't follow your argument here. What's impractical about being able to inherit from Arrays? -- Familiarity

Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 10:54 AM + 1/7/03, Simon Cozens wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes: The short answer, I suppose, is that we're not recreating Smalltalk--at least some small nod is being made towards Practicality. I really don't follow your argument here. What's impractical about being

Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Simon Cozens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes: Nothing, the impractical part is making arrays objects--they aren't, Hang on. We're saying that they should be. You're saying that they're not. You haven't produced any reasons *WHY* they're not. Why *aren't* they arrays? It's perfectly practical; most

Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Simon Cozens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Cozens) writes: they arrays? Bluh, I mean objects. Getting carried away; this is something I do actually care about, and I'll be quite unhappy if we screw it up. -- The Blit is a nice terminal, but it runs emacs.

Re: Variable Types Vs Value Types

2003-01-07 Thread Rafael Garcia-Suarez
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Like I said, you can always use delegation to subclass an array, or limit yourself to an odd and restrictive subset of behaviour. (Basically just vtable method overriding) Delegation has drawbacks compared to inheritance : you can't use a object that

Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Michael Lazzaro
I think this may be another case of it depends on what the word 'object' means, e.g. we're talking past each other. I hope. Let's operate from the assumption -- or somebody please CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- that the following syntax is valid: my int @a; my @a returns int; my @a is

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Jonathan Scott Duff
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:04:09AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: I think this may be another case of it depends on what the word 'object' means, e.g. we're talking past each other. I hope. Let's operate from the assumption -- or somebody please CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- that the

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Mr. Nobody
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Arrays have methods: my int @a = (1..100); print @a.length; # prints 100 my @b = @a.grep { $_ 50 }; # gets 51..100 .length is unneeded, since an array gives its length in numeric context, so you can just say +@a. grep

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Mark J. Reed
On 2003-01-07 at 11:31:13, Mr. Nobody wrote: .length is unneeded, since an array gives its length in numeric context, so you can just say +@a. Unneeded, but harmless. grep shouldn't be an array method either, it should be like the perl5 grep, as it is often used on lists, grep /foo/, keys %h

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Deborah Ariel Pickett
On 2003-01-07 at 11:31:13, Mr. Nobody wrote: .length is unneeded, since an array gives its length in numeric context, so you can just say +@a. Unneeded, but harmless. Getting off topic here (a bit), but I think it's a Mistake to have .length mean different things on an array [Number of

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Michael Lazzaro
On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 02:05 PM, Deborah Ariel Pickett wrote: On 2003-01-07 at 11:31:13, Mr. Nobody wrote: .length is unneeded, since an array gives its length in numeric context, so you can just say +@a. Unneeded, but harmless. Getting off topic here (a bit), but I think it's a

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Piers Cawley
Mark J. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 2003-01-07 at 11:31:13, Mr. Nobody wrote: .length is unneeded, since an array gives its length in numeric context, so you can just say +@a. Unneeded, but harmless. grep shouldn't be an array method either, it should be like the perl5 grep, as it

Re: Array Questions

2003-01-07 Thread Deborah Ariel Pickett
Perhaps .size for number-of-elements and .length for length-of-string would work? sarcasm This would just cause them to Think About Things A Different But Equally Wrong Way: as assembly language objects whose SIZE in bytes is the determining component of their existence. /sarcasm I am