--- Miko O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SUMMARY
C$var ?= $x : $y as a shortcut for C$var = $var ? $x : $y.
DETAILS
We have ||=, +=, -=, etc. These shortcuts (I'm sure there's some fancy
linguistic term for them) save us a few keystrokes and clean up the code.
So, concerning
--- Sean O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So 'if' and friends are just (native) subroutines with prototypes like:
sub if (bool $c, Code $if_block) {...};
IIRC it's not that pretty, unfortunately, if you want to support this:
if
--- Thom Boyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] groused:
I have to wonder how many people actually like this syntax, and how many
only
say they do because it's Damian Conway who proposed it.
Some of us like it because we've wanted something like it for years
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2003, at 11:00 AM, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes:
...the absence of the commas is what's special. If they were normal
functions/subroutines/methods/whatever, you would need a comma after
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may well
be
considered reasonable thing
Sounds like the good old days of trigraphs.
It's very
--- Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody:
# --- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# It's very much like the good old days of trigraphs. But on the plus
# side, once all the losers get their fonts/xterms/editors
# up-to-speed
# on extended character sets, the trigraphs
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but *I'm* planning on making
many, many Unicode synonyms, to make my code shorter and more readable.
For example, Cfor is too long, so I want to just make it curly-f,
(Æ). And Cwhen is even longer, so I'm
--- Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but *I'm* planning on making
many, many Unicode synonyms, to make my code shorter and more readable.
For example, Cfor is too long, so I want to just make it curly
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may
well
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
L2R/R2L syntax
Argh! No! It's back and this time it means business. The dreaded
left-right versus right-left thing came back, and this time it was
Damian applying the electrodes to the corpse. Of course, it being
Damian
he was instantly forgiven
--- David Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 11:50:14AM +, Richard J Cox wrote:
U+21DC Leftwards Squiggle Arrow and U+21DE Rightwards Squiggle Arrow
would
seem to fit the bill rather well maybe the ascii ~ and ~ are merely
aliases of the true symbols?
--- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody wrote:
Unicode operators in the core are a very, very, very, very, very, very,
very,
very, very, very, very, very, very bad idea.
We've already had this discussion. We wouldn't be bringing up using
unicode operators
--- Thom Boyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
Unicode operators in the core are a very, very, very, very, very, very,
very,
very, very, very, very, very, very bad idea.
OK, now I think I know how _you_ would vote on the subject of Unicode
operators. But would
--- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody wrote:
--- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody wrote:
Unicode operators in the core are a very, very, very, very, very, very,
very,
very, very, very, very, very, very bad idea.
We've already had this discussion
--- Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody wrote:
I don't like either of these operators. What's wrong with
@out = sort map {...} grep {...} @a
?
For a start, if these functions were to become (only) methods in Perl 6,
it would have to be:
@out = sort
--- Thom Boyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@a ~ grep {...} ~ map {...} ~ sort ~ @out;
That's going to be just plain confusing. Arguments to functions are
supposed
to be on the right. And what's up
--- Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Dutton wrote:
Given discussions about hyper operators in the past, I found this
rather interesting in the release notes.
http://pike.idonex.com/download/notes/7.4.10.xml
Interesting, but I still feel that vectorized operators give
--- Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 12:14:10 +0800
From: Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can I suggest that an alternative solution might be the following:
Suppose Perl 6 had two new very low precedence operators: ~ and ~
(a.k.a. bind
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Arrays have methods:
my int @a = (1..100);
print @a.length; # prints 100
my @b = @a.grep { $_ 50 }; # gets 51..100
.length is unneeded, since an array gives its length in numeric context, so
you can just say +@a. grep
--- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Murat Ünalan wrote:
print date if $var is int( 1..31 );
I don't think that the type needs to be specified here, especially if
the variable has already been declared to be of the required type, so a
junction should be sufficient:
print date if
--- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Storrs wrote:
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 10:58:49AM -0800, Mr. Nobody wrote:
--- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
junction should be sufficient:
print date if $var == any(1 .. 31);
Superpositions in the core? You're
This is a bit of an oversimplification. $foo and @foo do not always
behave the same, even if $foo and @foo refer to the same array object.
In particular, $foo doesn't behave like @foo in a list context.
Scalars must continue to behave like scalars in list context, even
if they're internally
While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
as this one to match a C float
/^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
would actually become longer:
/^([+-]?)before
23 matches
Mail list logo
