On behalf of the Parrot team, I'm proud to announce Parrot 0.7.1
"Manu Aloha." Parrot (http://parrotcode.org/) is a virtual machine aimed
at running all dynamic languages.
Parrot 0.7.1 is available via CPAN (soon), or follow the download
instructions at http://parrotcode.org/source.html . For tho
Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote:
For an Object to be a value, it means that if you build an object with
the same "value", it will be seen as the same "value" that some other
object with this value.
Perl 6 formalizes this by defining a "value type" as one whose identity
is key
TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-vts-systems.de |Perl 6| wrote:
I think that mutating methods of immutable value types just have
to modify the identity. The problem is how that relates to references.
Take e.g. the Str type
my $s = 'abc'; # $s points to 'abc'
$s.reverse;
where the reverse method re
Stéphane Payrard cognominal-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote:
I don't understand how = differs with that semantic from :=
I would expect that = would make a copy (clone?) of the object.
For a mutable object, I don't know if that copy should be immediate or deffered
by a mechanism of copy on write. Pro
Ter, 2008-09-16 às 18:04 +0200, TSa escreveu:
> I think that mutating methods of immutable value types just have
> to modify the identity. The problem is how that relates to references.
> Take e.g. the Str type
I really think we are looking at this problem from the wrong
perspective.
For an Objec
TSa wrote:
> HaloO,
>
> Darren Duncan wrote:
>> If you are wanting to actually mutate a Dog in a user-visible way rather
>> than deriving another Dog, then I don't think that calling Dog a value
>> type is appropriate.
>
> I think that mutating methods of immutable value types just have
> to mo
HaloO,
Darren Duncan wrote:
If you are wanting to actually mutate a Dog in a user-visible way rather
than deriving another Dog, then I don't think that calling Dog a value
type is appropriate.
I think that mutating methods of immutable value types just have
to modify the identity. The problem
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 4:26 AM, Stéphane Payrard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't understand how = differs with that semantic from :=
> I would expect that = would make a copy (clone?) of the object.
Assignment does copy the value between two containers, but in this
case, the value just happe
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:11 AM, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:09:41PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
>> Darren Duncan darren-at-darrenduncan.net |Perl 6| wrote:
So, how does one get an object to pretend to be a value type for
purposes of assign
* Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-09-15 02:25]:
> So, I'm wondering what happens in the string-to-number case if
> there happen to be characters within the angles that are not
> valid digits for the given radix.
>
> A similar question holds for calling radix converters as
> functions
10 matches
Mail list logo
