Re: subtype declarations

2005-05-02 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
On 2 May, Luke Palmer wrote: : S12 says: : : subtype Str_not2b of Str where /^[isnt|arent|amnot|aint]$/; : : My brain parses this as: : : subtype Str_not2b[Str where /.../]; : : Or: : : subtype Str_not2b[Str] where /.../; : : Neither of which really reflect how it is really

Re: [pugs]weird thing with say ++$

2005-04-25 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
On 21 Apr, fayland wrote: : It has been published at perl6.language, but have no reply. That was to be expected, as it's no language-design specific issue, and therefore, unsuitable for p6l. : In perl v5.8.6 built for MSWin32-x86-multi-thread: : : my $i = 1; : print $i++, ++$i; # 1 3 : my $i

Re: [pugs]weird thing with say ++$

2005-04-25 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
On 25 Apr, Juerd wrote: : I don't know how it's called on other levels, but we're still calling : that list|slurpy|plural context. array context looks too much like : Array context, which is something else. I confess, it's likely a bad habit, to coin it array context on p6l, although it refers

apo/A06.pod: spelling error(s)?

2005-04-20 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
In macro circumfix:(*...*) () is parsed(/.*?/ { } is the second enclosing part of the parsed parentheses omitted by intention? If not, I'd volunteer to provide a patch. Steven

[PATCH] Re: apo/A06.pod: spelling error(s)?

2005-04-20 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
On 20 Apr, Luke Palmer wrote: : Steven Philip Schubiger writes: : In : macro circumfix:(*...*) () is parsed(/.*?/ { } : : is the second enclosing part of the parsed parentheses omitted : by intention? If not, I'd volunteer to provide a patch. : : Fixed. Thanks. : : Luke You missed some

[PATCH] apo/A06.pod: spelling error(s)

2005-04-17 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
A spelling mistake and a word, that supposedly has been forgotten. Steven --- apo/A06.pod Sun Apr 17 14:34:16 2005 +++ apo/A06.pod Sun Apr 17 14:42:37 2005 @@ -2021,7 +2021,7 @@ All blocks are considered closures in Perl 6, even the blocks that declare modules or classes

Re: should we change [^a-z] to -[a..z] instead of -[a-z]?

2005-04-15 Thread Steven Philip Schubiger
On 14 Apr, Larry Wall wrote: : In writing some character class translation, I realized that : : -[a-z] : : and its ilk are rather hard to read because of the two hyphens : that mean different things. We can't use ![a-z] because that's a : 0-width lookahead. Given that we're trying to get