: sub abc_handler {
: do_pre_handler(@_); # pre part
: my $result = $_-(@_);
: do_post_handler($result);
: return $result;
: }
: push_handler(\abc, \abc_handler);
Well, what you think of it? Does it have disadvantages I'm not aware of?
Branden
myself clear with my approach, I may eventually
rephrase it...
Thanks, Branden.
Garrett Goebel wrote:
From: Branden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I was reading RFC 271 and thinking about this pre/post
handler thing. Why instead of having 2 subs, one for
pre and other for post condition, and having to deal
with things as strange as $_[-1], why don't we
have only one
has no GC, which is a
good thing, but you can always fake it with Refcounts,
which is much more efficient, and easily feasable with
C++. And at least they didn't chop from you templates
and operator overloading, which could do Java a usable
thing. At least I could then have a list of integers,
instead of the verbose code above!
- Branden
explicitly if you want anythinig to be shared. And if you explicitly
share something, then you should care the locks by yourself.
At least, that's my opinion.
- Branden
we put into locks, the more we enforce programmers to be conscient
about race conditions in multi-threading.
- Branden
!),
RFC 73, on making all built-ins return objects, which would do the
stringifying thing or even allow with and without fractions in one
object, and RFC 48, on changing localtime() and gmtime(), 'cause
maybe time() will go with them too!
- Branden
valuable...
Well, at least that's what I think about time. This change wouldn't break
compatibility, and changing the way we think about this function is a
healthy thing for our programmer minds. Just because UNIX decided that
its sleep function would return an int value, doesn't mean we have
e is too much a burden, then,
I say it again, we should stick with perl5! As Jarkko always quotes:
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
If old code and old-code thinking are the only thing that prevents us to
change time() or move it out of CORE, then I believe we should do it yes!
- Branden
won't ever be passed to the syscalls
sleep(3) and alarm(3). Perl will probably block that instance of the
interpreter internally and do some other stuff. It will probably use
its internal clock to measure the time to unblock it, and that clock
will probably have sub-second precision.
- Branden
an inexistent sub is called and it cannot be found
in existing packages and by package's AUTOLOAD's, this special sub is called
and it can auto-load packages that provide such functionality. Then there
would be a generic way to do such things.
- Branden
thought. But I proposed a new name for people that think that
``this would confuse UNIX users, that relate Perl's time with UNIX C's
time''.
Having the same name and modifying the semantics is more appropriate, IMO.
- Branden
o the user.
- Branden
o the user.
- Branden
(supposing
module install is not so hard as now, involving makefiles, and such...). And
this could also be used to identify interfaces. That's only an idea, but I
think it can lead to good things.
- Branden
requested version isn't found?
same as above.
If that's a common desire, I volunteer to help writing the beast. Can even
start it on Perl 5, and then convert it with p52p6. This way everyone can
see it and make critics before shipping it with Perl 6.
- Branden
for the reader. :)
Well, try that on strict 'subs'...
- Branden
. Using a (\@)
prototype on DirectBubbleSort would be ok too, since its name says right
what it does and everybody likes some vanilla syntax. But making it
@SomeList = DirectBubbleSort is the most error-prone thing I see! Nobody
will get it right on first use...
- Branden
, or a bad variable naming scheme
justifies this new feature.
A new feature doesn't need that much justification. And nobody is
advocating getting rid of "return".
Yes it does. Otherwise, we get even more bloated than now!
- Branden
, if they are pretty
obfuscated or are in byte-code form. Only a sandbox or something like that
can assure security in either case.
- Branden
Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 12:07:18PM -0200, Branden wrote:
The issue is actually not auto-downloading modules and their
prerequisites,
but actually packaging several scripts and modules in one file, so as
Java's
jar do. I think supporting this would be neat.
I
$x = shift;
parent_sub's $x;
return $x + $n;
};
return $increment;
}
Comments?
- Branden
.
Did I miss something here? Is it just me, or you also think this
(deploy/install) is essential for a language be used by `layman-users', and
not only JAPHs.
- Branden
).
Anyone of ActiveState there? Can't we adapt PPM so that it handles what's
needed? Or is it too different from what we want? Does it use zip or
tar/gzip or other?
- Branden
b. I guess their file format is a disguised .tar.gz, right?
- Branden
module for
Perl? How cross-platform is it? Can we bundle it with Perl (licensing
issues)? Is it stable? Will it give us the support we need (access to
individual files in the archive, and the ability to `fake' them as real
files through tied filehandles)?
- Branden
ndled like source filters
are today. In Perl 5.7 you can even have a source filter that decompresses a
.gzipped script and runs it, by using a source filter. I believe zip could
be handled by this also in 5.7. Perl 6 will certainly improve this area very
much.
- Branden
unt scheme seems to be working now...
Yeah, I know that... But I actually think this is because Perl 5's
implementation of refcounting is quite messy, specially when weakrefs are in
the game.
- Branden
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
+--+-+-+-+
- Branden
that use
different formats').
I think we should go for `standard' rather than `flexible' on this one.
Of course we still can change the file format, if someone isn't happy about
zip. That's the advantage of discussing it before making it: it's not here
for we to regret about it...
- Branden
in a determined format) an utility to convert a package
from one format to another. Otherwise, developer's life would be harder...
- Branden
John Porter wrote:
Branden wrote:
For example, with tgz it would be complex to deal
with running without extracting,
What? tar -z not good enough for you?
The problem is that we cannot access individual files inside the archive
without decompressing the whole archive, what
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 12:36:53PM -0300, Branden wrote:
The problem is that we cannot access individual files inside the archive
without decompressing the whole archive, what is possible with .tar (not
I do not see a huge problem in decompressing the whole archive
that we'd like them
to have the same interface, so that we can use one or another with the same
code.
- Branden
bject with a
DESTROY" check at block boundaries.
Only because the type is static, I don't think they wouldn't be references.
my $foo = new Baz();
{
my Baz $bar = $foo;
};
# DESTROY should be called on the object ref'd by $bar ?
# It's still ref'd on $foo !!!
- Branden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 06:17:34PM -0200, Branden wrote:
I put together a comparison table between par and rpm/jar.
You forgot deb, which I'd *much* rather deal with than rpm (if only
because I can point apt and dselect at CPAN). You also forgot the "Is
Vapo
proposed formats. And probably `p52p6' can be used to translate it
to Perl 6 and include it in Perl 6 distribution, cutting much work (and
time) when Perl 6 is ready.
- Branden
EMAIL PROTECTED], because I believe the main focus is on shipping it with
Perl 6, althought I think we'll probably have a preliminary version on Perl
5.
- Branden
e should standardize on one...
- Branden
th the par attached as
__DATA__ or something.
See my solution above.
- Branden
W, this plan would make it painful to do with perl5 setups, since they
commonly have odd dir structures.
This is something that should be redesigned for Perl 6. And I think this
discussion goes along with the one about `par', since these directory
structures exist mainly for installing extensions on them...
- Branden
tries to use it, it
raises an exception (dies) with a message about ``This object was already
DESTROYed.''. This flag could be used also to signal to the GC system that
the object already got its DESTROY method called, and it shouldn't be called
again. Just an idea, but...
- Branden
James Mastros wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 10:12:36AM -0300, Branden wrote:
Also, I think it would be valid for the programmer to explicitly say ``I
would like to DESTROY this object now'',
I'd think that an extension to delete is in order here. Basicly, delete
should DESTROY the arg
disposal. The programmer wouldn't have to do it
(and wouldn't do it most the time), but if he knows he uses many resources
and he would like to be nice, he *could* do it (not meaning he would have to
do it either...).
- Branden
net/theorb/
- Branden
one file and does a lot of processing over it,
you simply wouldn't care and let it be freed whenever the GC collects its
memory.
At 10:12 AM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
If resource exhaustion is the problem, I think we can deal with that when
we
try to allocate a resource and we get an error
$x) ? $x : "N/A"', but this has the
problem that $x is evaluated twice, so it doesn't work if instead of $x we
have a function call (or even if $x is tied...).
- Branden
rsion of the module
associated with OtherNamespace ??? What if several modules put things in a
common namespace ?
- Branden
it's what it does anyway!).
Sorry again to bother you with this issue again, but I actually think it's
worth trying it.
- Branden
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 01:40:53PM -0300, Branden wrote:
I propose the introduction of two new keywords (just like `my' and
`our')
for specifying a different scope: `global' and `outer'. `global' would
be
used to say that a specific variable or a list of them
' you said it has.
- Branden
), writing one or two more lines isn't expensive
at all...
- Branden
John Porter wrote:
Branden wrote:
Well, I checked the archives, and I found that the discussion begun in
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01441.html
That thread was rather tame; even so, I believe the end result,
if one can be deduced, is that the proposal is not a good one.
There was more
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 10:04:51AM -0300, Branden wrote:
Why `do FILE' behaves like eval, if there's eval to do it? Isn't this a
little too much not-orthogonal? Why don't we require `eval { do FILE }'
to
have the behaviour of not dying and setting
) = @_;
or even
my($a, $b, $c) = @_; ## current syntax keeps working.
- Branden
pointless changes with perl5.
If this makes `my' DWIM, I think it's not pointless...
- Branden
Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Friday 16 February 2001 07:36, Branden wrote:
But it surely isn't
consistent with the rest of the language.
It's consistent with "our" and "local", which are really the only other
things in the language that parallel its use.
Well,
I said:
Anyway, I don't see why `local' (and `our' and `my') should bind more
strongly than , and = . They are list operators, they should behave the
same
as those.
Actually, they *look like* list operators, they should behave like those.
- Branden
something just for the
fun of it. We must see where it's better, where it's not, if we would pay
the price for changing it, if it's worth it. I'm not proposing it because I
like changes, but I also don't the not DWIMness of some things of Perl.
- Branden
be there Perl
jokes?) Who writes this kind of code anyway?
- Branden
comma is signficantly
more useful than if it had a lower precedence'', instead of just saying
``Let's all just acknowledge that fact''. I really can't find one way in
which the current behaviour is more `useful'!
- Branden
). But both (potentailly) receive a list of arguments. With
`print' (or any other function) I don't need parenthesis if I don't want to
put them (and I almost always don't want them). Why with `my' I do need
them? Why don't these behave the same?
- Branden
, and we shouldn't discuss
taste.
- Branden
rl,
what also makes Perl a little easier to use. (Note I didn't say `every
*other* function', I *know* `my' isn't one.)
- Branden
saw it's Java-like syntax, I thought: Forget about
it! Perl syntax rules!
The bottom line is: please don't change the syntax, unless it's
unavoidable. It will cost many time of reading code until finding bugs
because of operators that used to work and don't work anymore...
- Branden
and
you're bound to drive some people away. Especially if these changes are
inconsistent with other languages.
IMO, consistence with other languages doesn't matter.
My conclusion: I say we do . and + or neither.
My conclusion: Let's not fix what is not broken.
- Branden
.$and.$nasty.$things.
Anyway, any behaviour that would break my script if I add/remove whitespace
of is nasty.
- Branden
Let's not fix what isn't broken.
or agreed by all, I
only wanted to share my thoughts about it, so that maybe someone can see
the subject on a different, new point of view.
- Branden
68 matches
Mail list logo
