Kealey, Martin, wrote:
> Nice idea; introduces one particular ambiguity though: would
>
> $m ** $n
>
> then be
>
> pow($m, $n)
>
> or
>
> pow($n, $m)
>
> ?
Neither. As with the reducing meta-operator, you would need to have
the ability to define an operator that takes precedence over a meta'd
Dave Whipp wrote:
> Jon Lang wrote:
>
>> So you're suggesting that
>>
>> A op* n
>>
>> should map to
>>
>> [op] A xx n
>>
>
> I don't think that that mapping works for Thomas' proposal of a repetition
> count on post-increment operator. I.e.
>
> $a ++* 3
>
> is not the same as
>
> [++] $a xx 3
Jon Lang wrote:
So you're suggesting that
A op* n
should map to
[op] A xx n
I don't think that that mapping works for Thomas' proposal of a
repetition count on post-increment operator. I.e.
$a ++* 3
is not the same as
[++] $a xx 3
(which I think is a syntax error)
and also not
Hi,
on behalf of the Parrot team, I'm proud to announce the release of
Parrot 0.6.4
"St. Vincent Amazon."
Parrot 0.6.4 is available via CPAN, or follow the download
instructions at http://parrotcode.org/source.html. For those who would
like to develop on
Parrot, or help develop Parrot itsel
Today bacek++ implement complex logarithms in rakudo, and one of the
tests failed because it assumed the result to be on a different complex
plane. (log(-1i) returned 0- 1.5708i, while 0 + 3/2*1i was expected).
Should we standardize on one complex plane (for example -pi <= $c.angle
< pi like Compl
