Karl Glazebrook wrote:
> I would rather see one largeish RFC integrating all these. More RFCs
> are not necessarily better.
>
The -language WG chair has requested that each RFC contain just one key
proposal, and that multiple related RFCs be drawn together with an overview
RFC.
I would rather see one largeish RFC integrating all these. More RFCs
are not necessarily better.
"Advanced Perl Multi-dimensional notation".
And n-dim things are not necessarily matrices.
Karl
Buddha Buck wrote:
>
> If I'm stepping on toes here, please tell me...
>
> Here are some suggestion
Buddha Buck wrote:
> If I'm stepping on toes here, please tell me...
>
See my other message today for the RFCs I'm thinking of writing. Buddha--you
and I should probably sought out offline which of us will write what RFC.
> RFC 169v2: Matrix Indexing
> Cover my $matrix[$x;$y;$z] syntax
>
Buddha Buck wrote:
> RFC X+2: Retrieving Matrix dimensions
> Present @#matrix as analogous to $#array
> Discuss what $#matrix should return, as well as @#array
> What is @matrix in scaler context? (undef, anyone?)
Number of elements? For sparse matrices number of non-zero elements?
If I'm stepping on toes here, please tell me...
Here are some suggestions for some upcoming language-data RFC's I'm
thinking of writing:
RFC 169v2: Matrix Indexing
Cover my $matrix[$x;$y;$z] syntax
Add Jeremy's $matrix[$listref] syntax
Discuss why two ways of doing it.
Move inde
