g must be an array". Perl 6
has changed the meaning behind the notation ever so slightly, but the
utility is still there.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also, I don't think that documentation is being treated as
second-class at all. It's being treated as first-class but different.
To form a poor analogy, imagine threads woven together to make a
tapestry. The blue threads are just as important as the red threads,
but they each may have different purposes in the overall design.
my two cents,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
termine that the conjunctions can't match the
same portion of the string)
Or it's much simpler than that and both of the regexes above just fail
because of the greediness of C<+> and there is no intra-conjunction
backtracking.
So ... anyone care to enlighten me on how this is supposed to work?
Thanks,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
o() looks like it's always in list context, but as far as
START goes, I'd think the first two call foo() only once while the third
calls it every time (just as you have it written).
Now, someone tell me if I'm right or wrong and why :-)
Nicholas Clark
>
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
d be persuaded to
make them non-interpolative by default. (i.e., the adverb would be
required to make them interpolate)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 11:23:05AM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> Adriano answered #1 I think: $yaml = Q:!c"{ $key: 42 }";
Er, I just looked over the spec again and realized that Q does
absolutely no interpolation, so it would be more like this:
$yaml = Q:qq:!c"
You have my permission as well.
-Scott
On Dec 29, 2007 7:04 AM, herbert breunung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> thanks to chromatic, so i have ask Jonathan Scott Duff, Phil Crow and
> wait for /Adrianos answer.
>
> what i yesterday also forgot to mention is that rumor says
on's Law
>
> But yes, it might be about time for hypertexting it. All but S03 have
> never really undergone a major reorg, and most of them could use it.
> Maybe it's time to set up Twiki on my home machine...
>
> Larry
>
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e zero and use a name like UInt that has other uses as well. Are
> there pragmas that turn signature failures into undef return values?
>
>
> Regards, TSa.
> --
>
> "The unavoidable price of reliability is simplicity" -- C.A.R. Hoare
> "Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it." -- A.J. Perlis
> 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ... = -1/12 -- Srinivasa Ramanujan
>
my two cents,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t where whitespace has meaning (e.g.
:sigspace is in effect), but you don't want the significant whitespace, you
can turn that off temporarily (or again, use some other technique).
HTH,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>) could all
> $string.rtrim internally.
>
If I were going to have ltrim() and rtrim(), I'd implement them in terms of
trim() rather than the other way around.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
the language you're
trying to bootstrap as much as possible with just a few primitives to get
things started.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
uage, or something that would better be provided
> by a tool external to the language itself?
Sounds usefulish for the perl 6 REPL. But not so much for "ordinary"
programming. So, given that, I'd say an external tool (module) is the
way to go.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
d...@lighthouse.tamucc.edu
hing($k, $v) }
>
> I think the anti-pattern of "0...@foo.elems" (or its incorrect
> form "0...@foo.elems") should probably disappear in favor of
> the above forms instead.
Or perhaps
for 0...@foo.end -> $k { ... }
@foo.keys may not be what the user wanted if @foo is a sparse array.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
the same program!).
>>
>
> Why?
>
See http://perlcabal.org/syn/S11.html#Versioning
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Moritz Lenz [2009-07-10 00:25]:
> > stat($str, :e)# let multi dispatch handle it for us
>
> This gets my vote.
Me too.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
and codenames for 2009 is
available in the "docs/release_guide.pod" file. In general, Rakudo
development releases are scheduled to occur two days after each
Parrot monthly release. Parrot releases the third Tuesday of each month.
Have fun!
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
erplate every time a constraint fails. Plus, the code is friendlier :)
>
I'd imagine that the functionality will fall out of the ability to have
nice failures because surely something like the following works now:
subset Filename of Str where { $_ ~~ :f or fail "No such file: '$_'" }
Perhaps s/fail/die/, but that seems like a means to your desired end.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
perlpi...@gmail.com
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 5:14 AM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> I'd much rather see a single consistent style throughout the setting
> than backwards compatibility with p5 naming conventions.
>
> If Temporal is the first setting module to use multiword identifiers,
> I vote for hyphens.
As another data
just 85% would be enough if it were
the right 85%.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tion would be the rough cut,
and later editions would be closer to reality as the language stablizes.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 12:19:28AM +1000, Iain Truskett wrote:
> * Jonathan Scott Duff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [15 Aug 2003 00:16]:
>
> [...]
> > Besides you could always provide online updates to your book as the
> > language changes. The first (dead tree) edition would be t
. (Better
would be "We're working on X and have hashed out the details of Y but
are having problems with Z", but I can see how that could cause all
sorts of spurious chatter)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
he the names and positions of things
that are optimized such that when one of the cached things are
modified, the optimization could be replaced with either another
optimization (as in the case above) or an instruction to execute some
other code (when we can't optimize the change).
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ute the return value of $block.
my $block = foo;
print "Main";
$b2 = $block();
$b3 = $b2();
$b4 = $b3(); # etc.
print "End";
or for the infinite version:
my $block = foo;
print "Main";
$block = $block() while 1;
print "End";# we never get here
Or am I missing something?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
to a variable? Consider the following code:
>
> sub printNum(int $x) {print "$x\n";}
> my $foo = 0;
> my $vindaloo = &printNum(int).assuming(x => $foo); #currying
> ++$foo;
> $vindaloo.();
>
>This code prints 0, not 1, because the currying binds the parameter to
> the value $foo had when the currying occurred, not the value it had when the
> curried function was called.
I'm sure there's some way to do this, but I can't think of it right
off.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
nd fall through to (3) if it was
> false?
Of course, that's how it works :)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> if $is_ok {
> yada() # has sideeffects...
> }
my $t = 0..6;
yada() if none(abs(@new[$t] ^- @new[$t+1])) > 3;
:-P
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t understand ... Do you mean something like this?
confer {
for @a -> $x { ... } || beget @results;
}
where "confer" is the do-like marker and "beget" is the yield-like
statement. But why not this?
for @a -> $x { ... } or do { ... }
I need an example.
thanks,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
llison the maintainer? Just prod her with an email or two.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ide of a special
block. But maybe it *needs* to be weird.
> On the other hand, putting the default up front is clearer if the
> block is long. Could even be something like:
>
> @foo = gather is default(@results) {
> for @a -> $x { pick $x if mumble($x) }
> }
Hmm.
@foo = for :gather,default(@results) @a -> $x { ... }
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
st the same?
$string.sub($pat,$rep,"each"); # ick.
$string.sub:e($pat,$rep); # hmm.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
my $what = do {
> while $cond {...}
> }
I would expect it to be the value of the last statement executed.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
err:
Operation High Precedence Low Precedence
INCLUSIVE OR || or
EXCLUSIVE OR ~~xor
DEFINED OR // err
This is in the "Read or Die" section of E4 if you want to read more.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
++ also @accum < $total { ... }
or maybe throw some latin in there
while $n++ et @accum < $total { ... }
while $n++ cum @accum < $total { ... } # maybe?
but that's probably more obscure than the comma.
Okay, so I don't have any good ideas either, but I like "also" if
we're getting rid of the "C comma".
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 01:46:39PM -0700, John Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > or maybe throw some latin in there
> >
> > while $n++ et @accum < $total { ... }
> > while $n++ cum @accum < $total { ... } # mayb
.notexported;
$o but= trulyglobal;
Or am I missing something?
> then write allow() to build roles for each value passed in, maybe taking an
> arg to say whether they should be truly global, or built in the caller's
> namespace
Isn't that what my, our, Exporter, and the globalifying * are all about?
I look forward with much anticipation to A12.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
while
round-bracket parameterization was, of course, run-time. I don't know
if that's even partially true though. If that isn't the distinction,
then what is? Why the two bracket styles?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
about whether one array was
bigger than the other, surely you could check that yourself. In any
case, run-time properties (is this redundant?) can help you out.
Perhaps you get an "undef but out_of_bounds" kind of value back when
you run off the end of the shorter array.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
. }
{ my role Learn { ... } $frank does Learn; ... }
so that when the role goes out of scope, the object no longer
possesses the abilities of that role.
I confuse myself everytime I think about this stuff.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
we would need a way to do same-signature replacement on methods
too? This would mildly argue against an implicit "multi".
> So whenever you bind a run-time role, the class looks to see if it
> already knows how to do the combination of roles this object wants,
> and if so, the role binding is very fast. Otherwise it creates the new
> composition, checks for conflicts, resolves them (or doesn't), and then
> binds the new composition as the object's current view of its class.
Neat.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:14:42PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 03:16:16AM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> [ my ramblings about a mechanism for role methods to supercede class
> methods elided ]
>
> I think there's a simple way to solve this: If
eeds it -- and should be associated with
> that class,
Yep.
> such that if that class later falls into disuse, the
> optimizations silently reappear.
That would be *some* trick!
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
bulary when coming up with the stories
:-)
> If worse comes to worst, you can always ask me. I manage to keep the
> largest amount of the language in my head with the most time available
> to answer questions :-)
Oh no, now *everybody* will be asking you stuff. :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
$j;
Though I'm not sure what that would mean.
I don't think junctions apply at all in vectorization. They seem to
be completely orthogonal.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" or
> some such.
Could someone put the non-unicode variants up there so those of us
with unicode-ignorant MUAs can know what exactly we're talking about?
Or alternatively (and certainly better), could someone clue me on how
to make mutt unicode-aware?
thanks,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 01:28:42PM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Scott Duff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 01:10:23PM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
> > > In reverse order:
> > >
> > > > %languageometer.values
ted to control
how the method is dispatched, that's exactly what .DISPATCH() is for.
(assuming .DISPATCH is writ in something resembling stone as I only
recall seeing it mentioned once or twice) Just write it so that it
doesn't consider the multi-method you want to forget.
You can also control how closely a multi-method matches by choosing an
appropriate method signature. For instance, an unprototyped
multi-method would sit at the bottom of the list with prototyped
multi-methods before it.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e an underscore between the words to be
slightly more readable. (I hate underscores, but I hate LONGCAPSWORDS
more)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:11:54AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On the final hand, if people fall in love with both self:sort and =sort, we
> could have =sort be a shorthand for self:sort where it's unambiguous.
Wouldn't =sort potentially muck with POD?
-Scott
--
Jonathan S
nfer it rather easily. Can we make that DWIM? (One way would be
> for the parser to convert that into if-else form if it appeared
> ambiguous.))
So ... how smart will perl6 be?
$o .= (foo,bar,baz);
$o .= (expr_returning_method);
Since human expectations vary I don't think I want these.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
u wouldn't. For that the more verbose syntax is required and I
think even desired. %foo`key is just a shorthand for the very common
%foo{key}
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
c -l
> > > 123
> > >
> > > `` gets used an awful lot
> >
> > But that's in Perl 5, which is a glue language.
> >
>
>And Perl 6 isn't? I use backticks quite a bit in Perl, and I don't see
> that changing if I upgrade to Perl 6.
Me too, but I write my backticks like qx():)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
% bar (for some reason, I can't like @ as an array dereference.
> [] does it for me.)
I'd favor Juerd's proposal over this madness any day :)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
seems infinitesimally
small to me (compare it to all of the added complexity in perl6
so far). Disambiguation based on context works. Show me the
complications you see.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
fair each
of those descriptions should mention %hash<> if the first one
does.
> I'm going to throw in one more argument at this point. It's based on a
> game you all played as children: Which One Of These Doesn't Belong?
>
> &stuff(1)
> @stuff[1]
> %stuff{1}
> %stuffï1ï
> %stuff`1
I have nothing to say to this other than "so what?" Really, does it
matter that much? Are delimiters really that important here?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ants perl to carp when any of the name, age, or id is
unspecified, he's back to manually checking the parameters at run-time.
Maybe that's a feature.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s Tail $.wagger = { $.wagger.new(...) }
which does some appropriate magic to call Tail.new because $.wagger
hasn't been initialized yet. Or is Tail also a Dog somehow? What happens
if the attribute is untyped? Presumably that's an error.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rt;
> ...
> }
Sure
method buffersize
will do { +$.buffer.bytes }
will store { ... }
IIRC
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
a.name1 };
See http://dev.perl.org/perl6/apocalypse/A12.html#Class_Name_Semantics
(Or was there someplace that said simple scalars need not be
parenthesized?)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ches. Also, that colon seems
*way* overloaded. :-) How about = instead?
#!/usr/bin/perl =
#!/usr/bin/perl =6
Although perl =P =i.bak =le '...' does look a little strange. But
double the dashes for double the fun! This is perl 6! :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
in impurity. There are
> more subtle reasons for wanting to add a required named parameter.
> Adding the => syntax to a method call, while the parameter isn't
> formally named, can be a useful language building idiom. That's why I
> support the C trait. But making a
ify a clear need (and
clear semantics!) before implementing something.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
to scope
> until the end of the statement in which it is defined. Is that correct?
> and what will perl6 do?
IIRC, perl6 will lexicalize $b as soon as it sees "my $b" so that it
should print
b
b
Assuming a left-to-right evaluation :)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
top of the file.
Or was that to imply that a literal "a" in the RE would be
interpretted as a "grapheme a" when :u2 is active?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
ber
greater than or equal to 0 and less than 1 which when used as an index
into an array gets turned into a 0.
As to why the second pop would take forever, I'd imagine that in order
to pop the last item from the array, all of the elements must first be
generated (i.e. we lose all laziness). And unless we have some magic for
generating them from either end, it'll start at the begining and
continue until the end, then stop before it ever does the pop. :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
suppose the perl6 equivalent would be:
{
temp $*ARGS = <>;
while (<$ARGS>) {
# ...
}
}
Not much different is it?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
zip(1..10, 5..20, <>) -> $x, $y, $text {
do_something_with $x,$y,$text;
}
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
r: @foo[..] %foo{..}
> or perhaps, with a slight analogy with filesystems, @foo[*]
> and %foo{*}.
Doesn't feel right at all.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff Division of Nearshore Research
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Analyst II
On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 12:39:57PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
> > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 07:35:08PM +0200, Aldo Calpini wrote:
> > > Larry Wall wrote:
> > >
> > > >Hmm. That makes me wonder what the slice notation for "
finition of "perl" will change slightly.
I think Perl6 will have sufficient hooks such that other languages
(or editors) will have complete access to perl's parsing ability via a
library (for instance. maybe it's via some other mechanism) such
that anything could parse perl if it knows how to ask. :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
's 5 characters too many, but it works.
print more $foo;
for more $foo { ... } # er ...
while more $foo { ... }
It sorta works.
I like "each" best though. Why exactly can't it work?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CONTROL {...} catch control exceptions
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tantiate me one."
>
> So, I was wondering about a synonym, like:
>
> uses Some::Module::That::Defines::A::Class $foo;
How about this?
my :autouse Some::Module::That::Defines::A::Class $foo;
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OTECTED];;*] == 5
BTW, could these also be made to work (or something similar)?
my int @b;
my int @a is shape(10;5;7);
@b = @a[*:by(2);;] # @b is now shape(5;5;7)
@b = @a[;1,4;] # @b is now shape(10;2;7)
@b = @a[;(*);] # @b is now shape(10;7)
@b = @a[;;;*] # @b is now shape(10;5;7;1)
@b = @a[;;;*5] # @b is now shape(10;5;7;5)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
something
> better. But I rather like shape. It's short, and not easily confused
> with other Perl 6 concepts.
Works for me.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and move to the other
er ... little end
After typing these I can see why Larry likes A and Z so much.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
g like this for classes too (though I may have imagined it)
where PRE blocks would fire immediately upon instantiation, and POST
blocks immediately after instantiation. Er, perhaps the terminology
is wacky there. The instantiation process goes PRE,BUILD,POST and
doesn't actually happen unless all of those happen.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
oo and became $<>
and <> respectively?
And FWIW, I kinda like $& even with the over-done & :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ckage'} and %*WHICH{'file'}) or some other suitable
abstraction (maybe there's an object that represents the program state
that you can query $*PROG.file, $*PROG.line, etc.))
But is it really worth the the secondary sigil?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ant, but I don't
know that :-)
On the whole, I liked the simplicity of the old <$m..$n> (or even
<$m,$n>) and would like something just like it only without the
ambiguity of <$m>. I'd even suggest <+$m> as a disambiguating mechanism
if we weren't using + and - for "character" classes.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
assertion to me. Assertions are more like "nouns" and all of *, +, ?,
and **{} are "verbs" that act upon these nouns. Using the angle
brackets for repetition suddenly makes rules look like "this sentence
no verb". :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
; at different
locations. One thing S5 didn't mention was how to know at which position
each substring matched. I'm sure that's filed away in the magic $0
object though.
Hopefully, I'm being clear.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
$:foo # a private attribute
$?foo # a compiler variable
$=foo # a POD variable
$ïfooï # a rule-scoped variable
That last one just doesn't fit with the others. I'd prefer something
like $~foo if I had a say.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
uld do, but it seems like it should be similar to
{ my @x = $IN.slurp; ... }
Can it be that unary = in n-ary context iterates like p5's <> except
when n == Inf or n == 0 (which are list and void context I guess) ?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 10:59:18AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:45:18PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> : On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 09:56:57AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> : > On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 10:38:10AM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
> : > : Can
; has too strong a class accessor connotation in most OO.
> >
> >"unpull?" ;-)
> >
> >
> pushf/popf. f is for "front".
Ew! I'd prefer :head/:tail modifiers to push/pop over that. But ...
> But I still don't see anything wrong with shift/unshift.
Neither do I.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mething }
if 7 < all(LIST) < 15 { do_something }
if all(LIST) eq 'fred' { do_something }
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
uess I'd write it as
for <> -> $l {
mysub($_) for $l.split(//);
}
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s evaluated (like 3/any(2,0,3) would generate a junction of
any(3/2,3/0,3/3) with that 3/0 waiting to be realized (evaluated) and
once it is, then $! would hold the "divide by zero")
In my current sleep-deprived state I think that you're more likely to
get a junction of various $! valus than have $! be a junction of
values (unless you're setting it explicitly)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fault, but rather enabled via a pragma of some sort (or, of
course, via an "autothreaded" trait). For the built-in routines this
isn't a worry as we get to design them appropriately.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 09:53:36AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> >The down side is that programmers need to be more aware of
> >subroutine/method side effects and write their programs accordingly.
>
> This is a *down*-side??? ;-)
Indeed ;-)
e module that he has created and released to CPAN starts
getting used with code that uses junctions and his users discover
bizarre behavior.
> That isn't likely to happen often.
Perhaps.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would imagine that the
Junction's C or C (ala python) method gets called and it does
something appropriate.
Those are my assumptions.
> Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> >OTOH, what happens with...?
> >
> > sub nofun($x is rw) {
> > $x += 2;
> > }
> >
> > $y = 3 | 4;
> > nofun($y);
That's either an error ("Can't modify constant") or the same as 5|6.
The former makes the most sense to me at the moment.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 12:17:35PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> >none($a, $a) == undef
>
> True.
Isn't this one false in the case when $a is undef?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 09:34:31PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 07:20:53PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > > Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> > > >OTOH, what happens with...?
> > > >
> > > &g
s of information about where we're at and where we've
been and where we're going so you might want to start there for
information.
hope this helps,
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ust a bit of
> >orthogonality that allows you to give "eggs, bacon, and toast" a name
> >and use it later.
> >
> @shopping list = <>;
>
> gives them a name you can use later, as well.
Except that you've introduced a definite ordering where one isn't
needed.
This whole analogy has me wishing for an Exegesis.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
some form of implicit multi sub that gets created to make C<
> Bar $f; > C< $f.Bar >?
I don't think so.
> Or does it only work if there is no C< multi? sub bar > in sight?
That's how I see (no sub or multi in sight)
You can always be explicit if you really want to use the IO notation:
Bar $f:;
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x27;ve strayed beyond my idea-space here :-)
> > One additional wrinkle is that *anyone* is allowed to declare a
> > class non-cooperative (open or non-final) during *any* part of the
> > compilation
>
> ... even after it is declared final?
Sure.
> Will core types be finalized by default?
No. It would be very un-perl-like to have such an unasked for
restriction IMHO.
Caveat lector, I'm not of the cabal.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
201 - 300 of 485 matches
Mail list logo
