On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 07:54:09PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 11:56:26AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
: > : On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Larry Wall wrote:
: > : > You subscript hashes with {...} historically, or these days, «...»,
: > : > when you want constan
Larry Wall writes:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 11:56:26AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> : On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Larry Wall wrote:
> : > You subscript hashes with {...} historically, or these days, Â...Â,
> : > when you want constant subscripts. So what you're looking for is
> : > something like:
> :
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 08:36:23PM -0500, Joe Gottman wrote:
:
: - Original Message -
: From: "Deborah Pickett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: To: "Perl 6 Language" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 10:44 PM
: Subject: Re: Mutating methods
:
:
: > On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 05.30, John
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 04:22:27PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: That's going to be the only way to reasonably unload a module, and
: even then there'll be some interesting repercussions. Like... what
: happens when you unload a module with instantiated objects? How can
: you tell if there are se
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 11:56:26AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
: On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Larry Wall wrote:
: > You subscript hashes with {...} historically, or these days, «...»,
: > when you want constant subscripts. So what you're looking for is
: > something like:
: >
: > if / ... ... { $?fo
- Original Message -
From: "Deborah Pickett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Perl 6 Language" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: Mutating methods
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 05.30, John Siracusa wrote:
> > The only case that seems even
> > remotely onerous is this
At 11:36 PM + 3/15/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another possibility is to use a UTF-8 extended system where you use
values over 0x10 to encode temporary code block swaps in the
encoding. I.e.,
some magic value means the one byte UTF-8 codes now mean the Greek block
instead of the ASCII b
At 12:28 AM +0100 3/16/04, Karl Brodowsky wrote:
Anyway, it will be necessary to specify the encoding of unicode in
some way, which could possibly allow even to specify even some
non-unicode-charsets.
While I'll skip diving deeper into the swamp that is character sets
and encoding (I'm already up
Mark J. Reed wrote:
Unicode per se doesn't do anything to file sizes; it's all in how you
encode it.
Yes. And basically there are common ways to encode this: utf-8 and utf-16
(or similar variants requiring >= 2 bytes per character)
The UTF-8 encoding is not so attractive in locales that make
heav
At 12:30 PM -0800 3/15/04, Larry Wall wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 08:39:02PM +0100, James Mastros wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >And how would it differ from END? You can't predict when the last
: >time a module is going to get used...
:
: Unless we support an explicit unload action on modules.
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 05:32:33AM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
: Boo, hiss.
:
: Two things:
:
: 1- I'd rather use "inplace" than self.
What is this "place" thing? I want the object to do something to itself
reflexively, which may or may not involve places...
: 2- I'd rather it be AFTER, than
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 12:30:51PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 08:39:02PM +0100, James Mastros wrote:
: : Larry Wall wrote:
: : >And how would it differ from END? You can't predict when the last
: : >time a module is going to get used...
: :
: : Unless we support an explici
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 08:39:02PM +0100, James Mastros wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >And how would it differ from END? You can't predict when the last
: >time a module is going to get used...
:
: Unless we support an explicit unload action on modules. This seems
: highly useful for long-runnin
On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 05:38:33PM -0500, Matt Creenan wrote:
: It just goes to show.. the perl community has already thought of
: everything..
Plus a few things beyond everything, if you're into surreal numbers.
Larry
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 03:47:57AM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
: > -Original Message-
: > From: Larry Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:38:11AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
: > : Larry Wall wrote:
: > : > multi sub *scramble (String $s) returns String {...}
:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 12:03:35AM +0200, arcadi shehter wrote:
: some time in the past there was a talk about ... ?? ... :: ... operator being
: a combination of two binary : ?? and :: . But I dont know the ruling.
: If one factorize trinary ??:: to two binary operators,
: ?? could act a po
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 12:10:40PM -0700, John Williams wrote:
: Or the slightly less attractive (IMHO) syntax invented recently:
:
: $x +=« ($a, $b, $c, $d);
The latest guess is that we're not using lopsided ones for binary ops, but
only for unary ops.
Larry
> This brings me to another "idea" I have.. although I have a feeling you guys
> have already thought of it.
>
> Instead of ...
> $x = $a + $b + $c + $d;
> How about ...
> $x = +«$a $b $c $d»
The closest way to what you have written is this:
$x = 0;
$x »+=« ($a, $b, $c, $d);
Or t
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Larry Wall wrote:
> You subscript hashes with {...} historically, or these days, «...»,
> when you want constant subscripts. So what you're looking for is
> something like:
>
> if / ... ... { $?foo{'baz'} ... $?baz } .../
> or
> if / ... ... { $?foo«baz» ... $?baz
Deborah Pickett writes:
> Someone Damian-shaped will probably come in and point out how to prettify that
> using "given", but it still wouldn't be as short as last week's
>
> $coderef.("argument").{hashelem}.self:sort();
But that still has problems. What's the important thing in this
"sentence"
On 2004-03-13 at 09:02:50, Karl Brodowsky wrote:
> For these guys Unicode is not so attractive, because it kind of doubles the
> size of their files,
Unicode per se doesn't do anything to file sizes; it's all in how you
encode it. The UTF-8 encoding is not so attractive in locales that make
heav
On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 05.30, John Siracusa wrote:
> The only case that seems even
> remotely onerous is this one:
>
> my My::Big::Class::Name $obj = My::Big::Class::Name.new();
> vs.
> my My::Big::Class::Name $obj .= new()
There's also the related issue of in-place operations on some
di
22 matches
Mail list logo
