On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:45:39AM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Explain how having indexes (arrays, substr, etc...) in Perl 6 start at 0
will benefit most users. Do not invoke legacy. [1]
Answer 1: Ignoring legacy, it won't.
Answer 2: Because C uses 0-based indexes, Parrot is written in C,
On Wednesday, May 1, 2002, at 02:27 PM, Aaron Sherman wrote:
unless my $fh = $x.open {
die Cannot open $x: $!;
} else while $fh.getline - $_ {
print;
} else {
die No lines to read in $x;
}
I think you need a better
On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 06:00:21PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
final and private are completely different concepts as I understand
them.
I wouldn't say completely different. They are both used for enforcement
of similar means, but you are correct, they are different.
I view final as being
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 09:07:03PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
Well, there's the Perl 5 reference counting solution. In normal cases
DESTROY is called as soon as it can be. Of course we're all anxious to
get into the leaky GC boat with Java and C# because we've heard it's
faster. I wonder how
On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 12:59:51PM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
Its not quite the same thing, but Java does have the concept of
anonymous classes (it names them 'inner' classes): Is Perl6 going
to have a similar concept?
Inner classes and anonymous classes are actually different in Java.
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 11:14:29PM +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
my $meth = foo;
$obj-$meth(); # $obj-foo();
I'm probably using the wrong terms.
This definately can't work if $obj is of a class which is strongly
typed.
You would do that in Java by using reflection. There's
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:46:48PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
And I'm tired of hearing the argument that Perl programmers can't get
used to a different operator for concatenation. I know better--after
all, Perl is probably what got them used to . in the first place. If
you can teach dogs to
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 11:31:18AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
There are many people who would prefer . to -, if for no other reason
than it's cleaner looking and is one less character to type. The fact
that it's become the industry standard for method call syntax is also
a point in its favor.
On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 03:15:22AM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
POD, presumably. Or maybe son-of-POD; it would be nice to have better
support for tables and lists.
We did this for the camel. Which, I remind the world, was
written in pod.
What kinds of things got added for the camel?
On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 03:42:49PM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 12:58:37PM -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
What? I don't think people should be writing either XML or HTML
as the source documentation format. I said that, quite clearly.
Then what are they going to write
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 09:21:51AM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
Indeed, this is the key problem with human use of XML. HTML was originally
simple enough to be human writable, its later, more powerful incarnations
start losing that (but you can always use a subset for simple things, and
XML
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 01:24:37PM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
XML is intrinsically no more or less difficult to write than HTML.
Wrong.
I beg your pardon?
Comparing XML to HTML is pointless, however; they are not the same
thing.
Wrong. And you only say that because you will not
On Fri, Sep 29, 2000 at 07:24:38PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
$foo = """Things like ', ", and \ have no special meaning in here.""";
Argh! *NO*! That way lies madness, or at least DCL's quoting mania. My
record, in a command procedure that wrote other command procedures that
submitted
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 04:12:09AM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
Add null() keyword and fundamental data type
I think that this is better done as a special overloaded object used
by database modules which wish to implement SQL-style tri-state logic.
Given that making overloaded objects fast
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 11:58:08AM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
I think that this is better done as a special overloaded object used
by database modules which wish to implement SQL-style tri-state logic.
It could be done as an overloaded object. You'd have to be able to overload all
the
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:21:52PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
No offense to Damian, but I tried to read and understand his documentation
and I thought I was back in grad school. I don't think it's the fault of
the writing either; I think that Quantum::Superpositions is trying to do
something
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
In Perl, this is the null character: "\0"
...
It's a shame you don't like it, but this is the way we speak.
Well, it's the way you speak. Myself, I'd call that the NUL
character. :
- Damien, exercising a pet
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 08:14:24PM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
Following Glenn's lead, I'm in the process of RFC'ing a new null()
keyword and value
As though one were not already drowning in a surfeit of subtly
dissimilar false values.
Hear, hear.
Three-valued logic is enough. Make
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 09:45:54AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
I would propose that the Cgrep operation should short-circuit if the
block throws an exception, with the value of the expection determining
whether the final invocation of the block should accept the element it
was filtering:
I
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 06:53:31AM +1000, iain truskett wrote:
/* File: C:\user\jv\demo.java */
t.java:1: Invalid escape character.
/* File: C:\user\jv\demo.java */
In that situation, I would say that the java compiler isn't really doing
what it should be doing. i.e. That looks
On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 08:41:46AM +1000, iain truskett wrote:
Does it try to parse other escape sequences (such as \t, \n, \r etc.) or
just the Unicode one?
No, just the Unicode escapes. Think of it as trigraphs in C -- it's
there so you can translate code from a more-featureful character
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 01:19:22PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
I recently suggested in p5p that for many system calls it could be
checked in *consta...darn, *compile* time whether they are used in
void contect, and _abort_. "No, I'm not going to let you get away
with doing a chdir() and
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 11:46:04PM -0400, Stephen P. Potter wrote:
Why is it silly? Hashes and arrays are *conceptually* very similar (even
if they are extremely different implementation-wise). One of them has
implicit key, the other has an explicit key. They both provide some sort
of
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 10:26:13PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
I like the idea of adding the context-aware operators, but I don't
think I'd use them as often as I use "the number of things in the
array". I think most Perl programmers would be in the same camp.
Unless you can show a
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 10:24:09AM -0400, Karl Glazebrook wrote:
It was the response which was blithe, it just re-iterated arguments we
are all completely familar with and did not address my point in the RFC.
Then perhaps we need to agree to disagree. I feel that a number of
people have
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:31:23PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
Sorry, this is exactly the argument we get from the C/C++/Java heads,
who find perl's lack of discrimination between strings and numbers so
distasteful. But if we can gloss over the difference between a string
and a number, we
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 05:34:51PM -0400, Karl Glazebrook wrote:
You appear to arguing that expressions in function argument lists should
not be evaluated in a list context. Is this really what you mean?
I guess I do. I guess I just hate contexts!
Context is a fundemental part of Perl.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 09:04:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
And context dependency is bad for people.
Actually, people deal very well with context dependency.
"Have you paid Bill?"
"Have you paid that bill?"
"It looks like a duck's bill."
"The President vetoed the bill."
A rose
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:46:04AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
The RFC doesn't mention localtime() for just this reason. The idea would
be localtime would be GONE in Perl 6, instead moved to Time::Local.
date() would replace it.
Why is this a good idea? Perl programs have been using
29 matches
Mail list logo
