Damian Conway wrote:
Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
Really what I've been wishing for was an operator (or whatever) to
let me do an
s// without changing the variable.
I would hope/expect that that's what the subroutine form of Cs would
do.
That is, it takes a string, a pattern, and a replacement
david wrote:
The brazen heresy continues...
http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/TERN-discuss
Are these people serious? What on earth is the point?
Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Conrow) writes:
I'm not seeing it. My problem, or is it not being mirrored yet?
I'm reading it via NNTP.
Interestingly, p6d doesn't seem to be listed on lists.perl.org
A big issue that still remains with literals is the stringification of
objects and references. In an effort to get the behaviors hammered
down, here are a few ideas:
First off, references:
By default, references should not stringify to anything pretty, they
should stringifiy to something useful
Brent Dax wrote:
Joseph F. Ryan:
# By default, references should not stringify to anything
# pretty, they should stringifiy to something useful for
# debugging. Heck, even perl5 style should be fine. Not only
Why? Isn't the pretty form more generally useful?
I don't think so; I'd think
Brent Dax wrote
To tell you the truth, I don't consider arrayrefs references anymore.
They're just Array objects that don't happen to be in @whatever symbols.
I don't know if this is the official view, but that fits my brain
better.
So you're saying that classes should stringify to a
Luke Palmer wrote:
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:43:44 +
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Disposition: inline
From: Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.20, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
On Sun, Dec 08,
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:11 PM -0700 12/9/02, Luke Palmer wrote:
You must remember that the Perl 6 parser is one-pass now.
It is? Are you sure?
It should be; the raw parsed data might be treated with regular
expressions in the parse-tree processing stage, but that shouldn't
count as a
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:16 PM -0500 12/9/02, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 5:11 PM -0700 12/9/02, Luke Palmer wrote:
You must remember that the Perl 6 parser is one-pass now.
It is? Are you sure?
It should be;
Doesn't mean it will be. And should is an awfully
Luke Palmer wrote:
From: Joe Gottman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 22:25:16 -0500
JG == Joe Gottman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JG Speaking of which, is there a run-time test to check if a variable
JG is of
JG integral type? Something like
JG print date if ($var
for a compiler
to figure out, especially when the rest of the language works a
different way. List assignment is much easier to read anyways.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This message was sent using the Webmail System hosted by OARDC Computing Services --
http://webmail.oardc.ohio-state.edu:8080
) {
@array.grep(code);
}
Or even if this function does not exist, there's nothing stopping
the compiler from simply aliasing:
grep {} @array;
to:
@array.grep({});
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the slightest degree), in order to know of what to
keep and what to throw away.
Any programmer who doesn't know that they are ignorant are almost
certainly instead arrogant.
Ignorant of what? Surely we shouldn't assume that we're all ignorant
of Perl?
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Perhaps in the grand scheme of things; however, anyone that is
redesigning a system should not be ignorant of how the old system
worked (even in the slightest degree), in order to know of what to
keep and what to throw away.
Oy. One more
like that
happened. :)
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Joseph F. Ryan wrote in perl.perl6.language :
I think the point of having Cif as a sub rather than as a separate
syntax is so the parser doesn't have to do anything special for
special keywords.
I think the goal was to simplify the compiler
argue that undef should remain a unary
operator only):
@a[2].undef();
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
this, but no it doesn't. PHP arrays
are simply associative arrays with a integer as the key value.
Of course, this doesn't mean I like the idea, but I just wanted to
point out that there are some languages that do it this way. However,
I hope that we are not going to be one of those.
Joseph F. Ryan
this type of thing a lot:
$var = $var ? 1 : 0;
How 'bout a shortcut for that, something like this:
$var ?= 1 : 0;
-miko
Doesn't the perl6 //= operator already do what you suggest?
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
by the Perl parser
- arrays are ordered sets/bags/etc seen by the Perl interpreter
?
Where s/parser/compiler/, and s/interpretter/runtime engine/? I
do believe that's accurate.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/? I
do believe that's accurate.
What joy I'll have explaining that one to my students . . .
Better you than me. :-)
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
).pop
This doesn't make any sense, since pop modifies the pop-ee.
What do you expect should happen here?
[@a,@b,@c].pop
Same as above.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2003-02-11 at 17:12:52, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
(@a,@b,@c).pop
This doesn't make any sense, since pop modifies the pop-ee.
What do you expect should happen here?
[@a,@b,@c].pop
Same as above.
Except that the Perl5 equivalent, ugly
(or a catchier name).
Peace would reign on earth, or at least p6-lang and p6-doc.
(I hope I'm not missing something obvious here, at any rate :)
Joseph F. Ryan
ryan.311@osu
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
--
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 18:29:29
Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
As near as I can tell, the only problem with the nice flow of:
A Iliteral is a piece of data.
A Iscalar is a variable that holds a literal.
A Ilist is a sequence of literals and scalars.
An Iarray
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
--
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 17:14:17
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
--
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 18:29:29
Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
As near as I can tell, the only problem with the nice flow of:
A Iliteral is a piece of data.
A Iscalar is a variable that holds a literal
? (-:
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
This message was sent using 3wmail.
Your fast free POP3 mail client at www.3wmail.com
...
XSLT PROCESSING STUFF
];
Provided, of course, that there is an parrot/imcc targetted XML processor. Who needs
a P6ML now? (-:
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
This message was sent using 3wmail.
Your fast free POP3 mail client at www.3wmail.com
Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
Andy Wardley wrote:
For example, it might be possible to do something like this:
use Perl6::XML;
thingy
blahblah blah/blah
/thingy
use Perl6;
print $thingy.blah;
We already have the ability to embed foreign languages (XML
redefining the match object class, which
probably isn't a good idea.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
this the :any switch of apoc 5?
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2002/06/26/synopsis5.html
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
of map;
otherwise, the arguments after the code block are flattened and
looped over.
This behaivor should be consistant across all of the perl6 builtins.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Luke Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:29:37AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
This has been alluded to before.
What would /A*B*/ produce?
Because if you were just processing the rex, I think you'd have to
finish generating all possibilities of A* before you
// $limit);
return $string;
}
So, given a call like:
generate (/(A*B*(C*|Z+))/, 4);
The C$string variable in the 2nd line of Cgenerate would become:
And the :any switch takes care of the rest. (-:
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
34 matches
Mail list logo
