Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
Such a grammar switching routine could operate either over a lexical
scope or over the rest of the file. The only restriction is that
one module not clobber the grammar of a different module.
Basically, we're trying to make the opposite mistake
At 2:34 PM -0700 4/5/02, Luke Palmer wrote:
You can do anything you like if you mess with the parser. Changing
the rules for recognizing an identifier would be trivial.
Does this refer to messing with the parser... compile time (that is, when
Perl compiles, not when Perl is compiled)? Or
Rafael Garcia-Suarez writes:
: Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
:
: Such a grammar switching routine could operate either over a lexical
: scope or over the rest of the file. The only restriction is that
: one module not clobber the grammar of a different module.
:
: Basically,
Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rafael Garcia-Suarez writes:
: Larry Wall wrote in perl.perl6.language :
:
: Such a grammar switching routine could operate either over a lexical
: scope or over the rest of the file. The only restriction is that
: one module not clobber the
Piers Cawley writes:
: In a use.perl post not far away I sketched out something like the following:
:
: module foo is Mixin {
:
: sub category($category, block) {
: block.abstract_syntax_tree.walk_with - $node {
: when AST::Method {
:
Dan Sugalski wrote in perl.perl6.language :
Don't forget, we already change parsing rules at compile time. Perl's
got three (maybe four) different sets of rules as it is:
*) Normal perl
*) Regexes
*) Double-quoted strings
*) Single-quoted strings
Adding another, or
Larry Wall wrote :
It's not clear that the lexer is a separate entity any more. Lexers
were originally invented as a way of abstracting out part of the
grammar so that it could be done in a separate pass, and to simplify
the grammar for the poor overworked parser.
Indeed. Another benefit
Just some thoughts in case you assumed people would only us Perl for
good.
$_='opcpez/xsjuft/qzax/,kvtu/gps/hppe!'
;szaxfsmyb-z,/!a-y !-print;
At 4:22 PM -0800 4/4/02, Larry Wall wrote:
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 3:11 PM -0800 4/3/02, Larry Wall wrote:
: Piers Cawley writes:
: : Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: :
: : On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: : They are assumed to be declared in
Dan Sugalski writes:
: Strict, but doesn't really matter. Nobody sane will use anything other
: than $^a and $^b.
:
: Well Are we allowing non-latin characters in identifiers? There
: may be potential interesting ramifications with those. Kanji
: specifically, though I don't have details
Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dan Sugalski writes:
: Strict, but doesn't really matter. Nobody sane will use anything other
: than $^a and $^b.
:
: Well Are we allowing non-latin characters in identifiers? There
: may be potential interesting ramifications with those. Kanji
Piers Cawley writes:
: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: Dan Sugalski writes:
: : Strict, but doesn't really matter. Nobody sane will use anything other
: : than $^a and $^b.
: :
: : Well Are we allowing non-latin characters in identifiers? There
: : may be potential
Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley writes:
: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: Dan Sugalski writes:
: : Strict, but doesn't really matter. Nobody sane will use anything other
: : than $^a and $^b.
: :
: : Well Are we allowing non-latin characters in
Larry wrote:
Yes, you can use anything with the letter or number property in
identifiers, plus you can use ideographs. As it happens, the Kanji
for one and two come in the right order, but don't try to extend
that to three.
Of course, exactly the same thing is true for the English
You can do anything you like if you mess with the parser. Changing
the rules for recognizing an identifier would be trivial.
Does this refer to messing with the parser... compile time (that is, when
Perl compiles, not when Perl is compiled)? Or are you actually talking
about screwing with
Luke Palmer writes:
: You can do anything you like if you mess with the parser. Changing
: the rules for recognizing an identifier would be trivial.
:
: Does this refer to messing with the parser... compile time (that is, when
: Perl compiles, not when Perl is compiled)? Or are you actually
At 3:11 PM -0800 4/3/02, Larry Wall wrote:
Piers Cawley writes:
: Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: They are assumed to be declared in alphabetical order. Whoa! you say,
: that could get confusing. It surely can.
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 3:11 PM -0800 4/3/02, Larry Wall wrote:
: Piers Cawley writes:
: : Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: :
: : On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: : They are assumed to be declared in alphabetical order. Whoa! you say,
: : that
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:41:13PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
Reading EX4 and seeing those place-holder variables made me wonder what
happens when someone (probably Damian ;) wants to use more than 26 of them.
Do the place-holder names scale up as if they're being automagically
incremented?
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:41:13PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
Reading EX4 and seeing those place-holder variables made me wonder what
happens when someone (probably Damian ;) wants to use more than 26 of them.
Do the place-holder names scale up as if they're being automagically
incremented?
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:41:13PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
Reading EX4 and seeing those place-holder variables made me wonder what
Where is EX4? It's not at perl.org... so... ??
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:19:13PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:41:13PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
Reading EX4 and seeing those place-holder variables made me wonder what
Where is EX4? It's not at perl.org... so... ??
Well, it's linked to from use.perl.org and
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
They are assumed to be declared in alphabetical order. Whoa! you say,
that could get confusing. It surely can. But if you're doing
something complicated enough that alphabetical order would be
confusing, don't use this shorthand.
Piers Cawley writes:
: Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: They are assumed to be declared in alphabetical order. Whoa! you say,
: that could get confusing. It surely can. But if you're doing
: something
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 12:41:13PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
Reading EX4 and seeing those place-holder variables made me wonder what
happens when someone (probably Damian ;) wants to use more than 26 of them.
Do the place-holder names scale up as if they're
Piers Cawley wrote:
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
They are assumed to be declared in alphabetical order. Whoa! you say,
that could get confusing. It surely can. But if you're doing
something complicated
26 matches
Mail list logo
