Author: autrijus
Date: Mon Apr 3 05:47:07 2006
New Revision: 8553
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S09: Leo pointed out the paragraph on autovivifiction
is still mentioning references. Replace it with modern
wording (surface semantics stays unchanged)
Modified:
This is perl 6, right?
my %hash; $hash{foo}{bar} - shouldn't it be %hash{foo}{bar}?
On 4/3/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: autrijus
Date: Mon Apr 3 05:47:07 2006
New Revision: 8553
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S09: Leo pointed out the paragraph
On 4/3/06, Amos Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is perl 6, right?
my %hash; $hash{foo}{bar} - shouldn't it be %hash{foo}{bar}?
%hashfoobar even.
Luke
Author: autrijus
Date: Mon Apr 3 15:48:30 2006
New Revision: 8555
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
* S06: Make it clear that concat-means-concat for duplicated
named arguments, and that it is possible to bind a tuple
into a scalar.
sub fun (Int @x) { ... }
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 3 15:59:38 2006
New Revision: 8556
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
Fixed P5isms in P6 code.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 02:32:03AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Given perl6's use of unicode as a basis, could we get curly quotes,
: both single and double, to do the same things that straight quotes do?
Depends on what same thing means, I suppose. Looks like you want
them directional, which
Kudos to all on the Perl 6 mailing list,
What's the conceptual difference (or relationship) between context and type
coercion? Is
$moose.prefix:~
the same as
$moose.coerce:as(Str)
for instance?
And forgive my brain, but how would you nicely define coercion in a class?
Like, could you
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:23:28PM -0700, Joshua Choi wrote:
: Kudos to all on the Perl 6 mailing list,
:
: What's the conceptual difference (or relationship) between context and type
: coercion? Is
: $moose.prefix:~
: the same as
: $moose.coerce:as(Str)
: for instance?
No difference.
:
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 08:24:51PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: There's some discussion about whether it should simply be:
:
: method as (Str) {...}
: method as (Int) {...}
:
: maybe with an is deep thrown in for good measure, but we haven't
: quite got there yet.
Er, to have multiple of
