Author: larry
Date: Sat Sep 6 21:22:00 2008
New Revision: 14580
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
"where" as Junctional infix resembling "&", but with order guaranteed
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
==
On 2008 Sep 6, at 13:57, Larry Wall wrote:
But basically I think NIL is a mild form of failure anyway, so it's
fine with me if () is a form of failure that is smart enough to be
I'm thinking () is the non-scalar (list, array, capture, maybe hash)
version of undef, which acts like a value unle
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 07:06:30PM +1100, Илья wrote:
: Hello there,
: what :foo<> should exactly produce?
: At first I was expecting:
: foo => ""
: but in Rakudo:
: foo => []
: and it looks like the right thing on the other hand.
:
: (I have started this topic in the November mail list
:
http://
Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote:
No, just the new exception, which merely has to contain the old
unhandled exceptions somehow in case the user wants more information.
OK, so it's more like the "inner exception" in Microsoft's .NET
framework. My C++ exceptions have always had t
On Sep 6, 2008, at 10:51 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:38:42AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
The when statements are just like if statements. After executing
one,
it goes on to the following statement which does not have to be a
conditional statement. That is, you can mix
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 06:44:22PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
> I'm trying to work out some details of this area, but I don't understand
> what S04 is trying to say. Could someone please point me in the right
> direction? I'd be happy to then edit the S04 to contribute.
>
>
> In S04, the "Ex
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 09:41:07AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:44:05AM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> : The subject says it all: should !~~ with a regex on the RHS set $/?
>
> For now I would assume that the meta operator rewrites
>
> $a !~~ $b
>
> to
>
> (not $a
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:38:42AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
> The when statements are just like if statements. After executing one,
> it goes on to the following statement which does not have to be a
> conditional statement. That is, you can mix when statements with plain
> uncondition
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:44:05AM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:
: The subject says it all: should !~~ with a regex on the RHS set $/?
For now I would assume that the meta operator rewrites
$a !~~ $b
to
(not $a ~~ $b)
so .ACCEPTS has no clue that it is dealing with a negated operator.
In o
The when statements are just like if statements. After executing one,
it goes on to the following statement which does not have to be a
conditional statement. That is, you can mix when statements with plain
unconditional statements.
If multiple when conditions match, it runs all of them. It
The subject says it all: should !~~ with a regex on the RHS set $/?
Cheers,
Moritz
--
Moritz Lenz
http://moritz.faui2k3.org/ | http://perl-6.de/
Hello there,
what :foo<> should exactly produce?
At first I was expecting:
foo => ""
but in Rakudo:
foo => []
and it looks like the right thing on the other hand.
(I have started this topic in the November mail list
http://groups.google.com/group/november-wiki/browse_thread/thread/939216e836f69baa
12 matches
Mail list logo
