As many of you may know, I've recently moved to the other side of the
world, and my life's a bit hectic. I hadn't counted on p6-l bursting
into life just now, and while I'd like to keep right up to date with it
I really can't guarantee daily reading.
Would anyone like to volunteer to do weekly
I've got one ready to go on the topic of "Perl 6: the story so far".
I'm presenting it next week at linux.conf.au and would be happy to
submit it for YAPC and/or TPC.
K.
mstevens other languages are great. they are a source of features to
steal^Wborrow.
Skud INTERCAL
mstevens except maybe intercal
uld
prefer most correspondence to be addressed to me at my home address,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you in advance for your forbearance,
K.
--
Kirrily "Skud" Robert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://infotrope.net/
Could we please take discussion of 179 to -data? I think that's where
it should be.
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948
Mark-Jason Dominus has indicated that he would like to be replaced as
chair of the regex sublist. Would anyone else like to take on this role
for the next few weeks? The responsibilities include:
- weekly report to me
- guide discussion on regex related issues
- encourage RFC authors to
There's been a lot of discussion lately on -meta which implies that the
RFC/brainstorming process has gotten out of control. I personally think
that it's going exactly as it should, and I've seen little to worry
about, which is why I've been fairly hands-off apart from trying to get
some
Does this discussion pertain to a particular RFC? If so, could the RFC
number please be quoted in the subject?
If it's not already RFC'd, who will volunteer to do it?
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:31:00PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
chomp() is best used for chop()s main raison d'etre, removing $/
from a string. I say we drop chop().
Works for me. Are you going to RFC it?
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 10:31:48AM -0400, Michael Maraist wrote:
Request For New Pragma: Implicit
Good idea, but you have it backwards.. If anything, there should be an
"explicit" keyword..
This resonates well with me. I had a funny feeling about "use Implicit"
and I wasn't sure what it was,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:53:46PM -0400, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Michael Maraist wrote:
Good idea, but you have it backwards.. If anything, there should be an
"explicit" keyword..
Remember, we want
% perl -p -e 's/foo/bar/g' file.txt
Oh, I know. I threw it in
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:21:19AM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
Allow for a list of loop variables in for(each) statements, i.e. e.g.,
foreach my ($x, $y, $z) (@list) { ... }
Hear, hear. I like this one :)
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open
(yes, I'm in an RFC-commenting mood today...)
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:22:31AM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
Add Clist keyword to force list context (like Cscalar)
Makes sense to me. Does it connect in any way with Damian's generic
want() function?
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:43:56PM -0400, Jerrad Pierce wrote:
Since everyone seems intent on breaking backward compatibility
(Okay, so no one is explicitly setting out to do so, it is merely often
dismissed as a non-issue). How about an RFC be done proposing that
perl6 ship with a module named
I've just run a nasty hairy script over the RFC repository and sent
email to those people who I think have language RFCs but haven't put
statuses on them yet.
My aim in this is to figure out which RFCs are still actively under
discussion and which aren't. Some people haven't updated their RFCs
Sumesh,
Please read http://dev.perl.org/ for the correct way to post a Perl 6
RFC. The first thing you need to know is that they should go to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], not direct to the mailing list.
Secondly, you need to make sure that things your'e RFCing aren't already
available in Perl. Some of
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 01:01:20PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Larry Wall writes:
I'd entertain a proposal that ... be made a valid term that happens
to do nothing, so that you can run your examples through perl -c for
syntax checks. Or better, make it an official "stub" for rapid
On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 05:22:17PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
RFC: Perl6 is Final. There will Be No Perl7
RFC: Everything is Accessible and Mutable
RFC: The perl6 reference implementation, no matter how slow it is,
will be written in perl5, in some kind of well defined virtual machine.
RFC:
On Sat, Aug 19, 2000 at 05:45:39PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
At first I thought this was a -io item, but then I realized the -io part is
easy; it's the -language part I need to get right :-)
Um. The -io sublist is called -language-io for a reason -- it's for
language discussions related to IO.
On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 08:46:17PM +0100, Richard Proctor wrote:
There is one significant area of perl that has very little attention here
(other than one of my RFCs) that is regexs.
Are you volunteering to chair a sublist?
*grin*
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 10:35:09AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some permanent
sublists, which we're informally leaning towards already. Something
like:
-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
-subs = ALL sub/method/func
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 11:15:40PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
Sorry I didn't chime in earlier, but I would like to say that I prefer
published deadlines. Reason: people will talk for as long as you give
'em. However long a meeting is scheduled for, that's how long it will
take. We're
This discussion should be on the -datetime sublist. Please do not
discuss this RFC any further on the main language list.
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone:
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 09:19:20AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
I realize this is very pedestrian compared to the exception-handling stuff
we've been tossing around, which could largely be said to render the issue
moot; but I thought I'd shake the branches anyway and see what fell out.
I'm
-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
-subs = ALL sub/method/func issues, like lvalue subs
-strict = ALL lexical/global variable scoping issues
-objects = ALL OO and module issues
-flow = ALL flow/threading issues
-errors = ALL error
Please take this discussion to perl6-language-datetime. Thanks!
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948 Mobile: +61 410 664
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 09:27:23PM -0700, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
LIST: perl6-language-objects
CHAIR: Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MISSION:Develop RFCs related to objects and OO programming in
Perl, possibly rationalising existing RFCs where they
OK, weekly report. Ugh.
The language group has generated the vast majority of the 100+ RFCs in
existence, and is suffering under the deluge of 100-200 posts a day. I
would prefer this to be down around 50, but no luck yet :-/ Part of the
problem seems to be timezone related... the lag time
(reply-to set to bootstrap)
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 01:36:47AM -0600, Tony Olekshy wrote:
On this matter, should something like this be a (meta) RFC?
Guidelines for Developing Changes for Perl 6 (v0.1).
There's nothing to stop you writing an RFC on whatever you like :)
However, there's
Last night we had a Melbourne.pm dinner and we were, of course,
discussing Perl 6 and the language RFCs.
Something that became apparent was that the RFCs are a tad confusing,
and we came up with some things which we thought might help.
Firstly, an RFC should usually only address one point.
The multiline comments sublist was due to expire on the 10th (a few days
ago). It's now time to perform the wrapup and close the sublist.
The chair was Michael Mathews, who I'd now like to ask to present a
summary of the sublist's discussion to us, and tell us about the status
of the multiline
The unlink sublist was due to expire on the 12th (a few days
ago). It's now time to perform the wrapup and close the sublist.
The chair was Nathan Wiger, who I'd now like to ask to present a
summary of the sublist's discussion to us, and tell us about the status
of the unlink RFC (RFC 29).
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 07:44:11PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
=head1 TITLE
Add change bar functionality to pod
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: August 08, 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 65
I don't think this is a
On Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 02:28:29PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 03:01:48PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I'm not sure anyone does that much in the way of time/date work that it'd
make a difference. Besides, we're talking internal here--time() may still
return Unix
I'm several days behind on -language due to dodgy home dialups and the
noise and insanity I suffer at the office.
I'm making a valiant attempt to catch up on 700 posts right now, but
would appreciate it if people could email me privately if there's
anything they particularly want to bring to my
On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:41:06PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
$scalar = date; # scalar ctime date, same as current
$object = date; # object with accessor functions (new)
How are these distinguished?
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 10:54:25PM +0900, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 11:47:47PM +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
I feel that your RFC misses the inclusive nature of perl.
Then I withdraw it. Perl should not stay Perl, fuck it. Call me when it's
time to get coding.
This language is
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 09:14:49PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
=head1 TITLE
Request For New Pragma: Shell
Pragmas have lower case names by convention, so this should be "use
shell".
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:36:02AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
it looks like typechecking and named params should fork off into a subs
subgroup. all of you with an itch to write an rfc, here is your chance.
Anyone want to put their hand up as a chair of such a sublist? Damian's
got the closest
Please do not send your RFCs to both perl6-rfc and perl6-$working_group.
The RFC librarian will automatically forward your RFC with a number on
it, which is kinda neater.
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level
Ask, can we please have this one too?
List name: perl6-language-subs
Chairs: Tim Jenness [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Damian Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] (if he wants it)
Charter:Draft, discuss, and revise RFCs relating to subroutines
in Perl 6, eg named
I was having a think about the volume of discussion on -language and
whether it's workable. From my point of view, I'd prefer that it was
about half as busy, maybe even less. Fifty posts a day I could easily
cope with and spend time thinking about; a hundred and fifty, or two
hundred and fifty,
I propose a sublist "perl6-language-errors" to cover the following
topics:
- exceptions
- $! and $?
- any other error handling topics, as seen from a language viewpoint
If you wish to say yes/no to this proposal, please email me privately.
If you have detailed comment, please post on-list.
I propose a sublist, perl6-language-flowcontrol, to discuss the
following:
- case/switch
- uri's looping stuff
- anything else related to flow control, from a language perspective
Let me know what you think or if you're interested in chairing this group
(uri? sounds like your kind of thing?)
This one should be discussed on -subs as well, please.
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948 Mobile: +61 410 664 994
[ Cc'd back to -language, hope you don't mind ]
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 09:08:18PM +0200, Jean-Louis Leroy wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please take discussion on this RFC to the forthcoming -subs sublist.
Really. Just hold off for a little while until the list is up. Should
be really
Hear, hear!
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948 Mobile: +61 410 664 994
If it's a language thing (as your mailing list field in your RFC
indicates) then it should be on -subs.
If it's a precompiler thing then, um, doesn't that fall under internals?
Nope. Internals implements (and possibly says "You want us to do
*what*!?!?"), language designs. Get us a design and
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:07:07PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
i like perl6-language-flow better.
Yeah, so do I. I did wonder whether maybe it wasn't clear enough,
though.
s - case/switch
try/catch
Any thoguhts on the errors sublist? should this be there, or in -flow,
or what?
/me takes 1
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 02:34:07PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
that is a major reason why i want to move all of those rfc's under the
flow one so we can properly address that low level design and language
changes to support them all. i should have my draft rfc done later
tonight and will post it.
Please take this discussion to the -strict mailing list.
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948 Mobile: +61 410 664 994
WORKING GROUP: perl6-language- flow
CHAIR: uri guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MISSION: Draft, discuss, and revise RFCs relating to flow control
in Perl 6, eg switch/case, looping, etc. Suggest/request
other flowcontrol-related lists if appropriate
WORKING GROUP: perl6-language-unlink
CHAIR: Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MISSION:Discuss and redraft RFC 29. Draft and discuss an
opposing RFC *or* rename RFC 29 to "ways of dealing with
unlink()" and discuss various viewpoints.
DEADLINE:
WORKING GROUP: perl6-language-io
CHAIR: Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MISSION:Draft and discuss I/O related RFCs, including (but not
limited to) RFCs 14 and 30.
DEADLINE: 3 weeks, extensible on request (end August 26)
DESCRIPTION:Submit I/O related
OK, here's my summary of language RFCs as they currently stand. As
I said before, this list will always be available from
http://infotrope.net/opensource/software/perl6/
I would appreciate if people could do the following:
1. put their hands up to write the "up for grabs" RFCs
2. work towards
Ask, can we please have the following list:
Name: perl6-language-strict
Chairs: J. David Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Daniel Chetlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charter:Discuss the use of the strict pragma in Perl 6
Timescale: 2 weeks (finish August 18th)
Yes indeed:
List name: perl6-language-mlc
Chair: Michael J. Mathews [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charter:Discuss and redraft the multiline comments RFC
Timescale: 1 week (end Thursday 10th August)
Deliverables: Michael to post the redrafted RFC back to perl6-language
Ask, can
On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 01:23:35PM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
I really should get all these ideas into an RFC.
Yes, please :)
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 01:09:46PM -0800, Michael Fowler wrote:
Several people have suggested strong typing as a feature, and have been shot
down one by one. However, I think it can be done without forcing it on
everyone.
In fact, it can be done with Perl 5, as various people have pointed out,
Could you please write up an RFC on this?
K.
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 10:04:38AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
There was some discussion at TPC4 that typeglobs could be expunged from
P6. If this is likely, it would free up a type-defining punctuation
character (*).
Could this be used for
60 matches
Mail list logo
