On 2010-07-23, at 4:25 am, Moritz Lenz wrote:
I'm still not convinced. [that there should be a special index variable]
Yes, it would be convient, but I've yet to see a non-contrived example where
it's actually necessary, and which can't be implemented trivially with other
Perl 6 tools.
I
If we expected Perl6 to be able to recognize these series and continue
them based on nothing but the first few elements, that would be a
dwimmy OEIS. (And an OEIS module that did that by consulting the real
OEIS would be cool, outside of core.) But that's not what this is
about. This is just
Am 23.07.2010 00:29, schrieb Damian Conway:
However, those *are* clunky and nigh unreadable, so I certainly wouldn't
object to having the index of the next generated element readily
available as an explicit variable in a series' generator block.
That would make all manner of evil both easier
Hi,
Am 22.07.2010 17:18, schrieb Jon Lang:
When I last reviewed the writeup for the series operators, I noticed two issues:
First, why is the RHS argument a list? You only ever use the first
element of it; so why don't you just reference a single value?
The idea is that you can continue
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote:
The difficulty you're running into is that you're trying to use the wrong
tool for the job. Just don't use the series operator when it's not easy to
use. Perl 6 has other mechanism too, which are better suited for these
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Aaron Sherman a...@ajs.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote:
The difficulty you're running into is that you're trying to use the wrong
tool for the job. Just don't use the series operator when it's not easy to
use.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Jon Lang datawea...@gmail.com wrote:
I also think it's doable without a special tool:
0, { state $i = 1; $^a + $i++ } ... *
Kludgey; but possibly doable.
Well, it's kind of what state is there for.
But what I'd really like to see would be for the
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Aaron Sherman a...@ajs.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Jon Lang datawea...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, it would be a
special tool; but it would be much more in keeping with the keep
simple things easy philosophy that Perl 6 tends to promote:
0, {
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Jon Lang datawea...@gmail.com wrote:
I do have to admit that that's awfully clean-looking, but the
implementation
would force a closure in a series to behave differently from a closure
anywhere else.
How so?
Unlike some of you, I haven't managed to
On 23 July 2010 01:41, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote:
Use the right tool for the right job:
square numbers: 0, 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, etc.
(1..10).map(* ** 2)
Or even just:
(1..10) »**» 2
Note that you can also get most of the effects you want by using
@_ in the series'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/22/10 11:18 , Jon Lang wrote:
Second, I'm trying to think of a simple and intuitive way to write up
a series expression for:
triangle numbers: 0, 1, 3, 6, 10, 15, 21, etc.
square numbers: 0, 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, etc.
factorials:
11 matches
Mail list logo
