On 7/18/05, Sam Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this needed, when you can just;
>
>atomic {
> unsafeIO { $dbh.begin_work };
>
> unsafeIO { $dbh.do(...) };
>
> unsafeIO { $dbh.commit };
>} CATCH {
> $dbh.rollback;
>};
Shouldn't that `CATCH` block be wit
This currently works in Pugs:
for [1..10].pairs -> Pair $x { say $x.value }
But this does not:
for [1..10].pairs -> $x { say $x.value }
Because the ruling that pairs must not be bound to parameters that are
not explicitly declared to handle them. Is this a desirable behaviour?
Thanks,
Larry,
On Jul 18, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 02:54:40PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: Ok, I will un-warnock myself here :)
Sorry, I've been occupied by various time-consuming family obligations.
My own fault, I asked on the weekend. People *should* spend time
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 08:42:24PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: This currently works in Pugs:
:
: for [1..10].pairs -> Pair $x { say $x.value }
:
: But this does not:
:
: for [1..10].pairs -> $x { say $x.value }
:
: Because the ruling that pairs must not be bound to parameters that are
Ok, I will un-warnock myself here :)
As of r5674 in the Pugs tree, the Perl6::MetaModel now supports all the
A12 dispatch orders.
:canonical # canonical dispatch order
:ascendant # most-derived first, like destruction order
:descendant # least-derived first, like con
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 02:54:40PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: Ok, I will un-warnock myself here :)
Sorry, I've been occupied by various time-consuming family obligations.
: And after some discussion on #perl6 I decided to make 'C3' the
: algorithm of choice for the :ascendant ordering, and al
Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This currently works in Pugs:
>
> for [1..10].pairs -> Pair $x { say $x.value }
>
> But this does not:
>
> for [1..10].pairs -> $x { say $x.value }
>
> Because the ruling that pairs must not be bound to parameters that are
> not explicitly declared
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 03:34:36PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Say I make an "accessor" method for an attribute that doesn't really
: 'exist'.
:
: For instance, a good example of this is the "month_0" vs "month"
: properties on a date object; I want to make both look equivalent as
: real properties
Larry Wall wrote:
> > Users of the class includes people subclassing the class, so to them
> > they need to be able to use $.month_0 and $.month, even though there
> > is no "has $.month_0" declared in the Class implementation, only
> > "has $.month".
We thought about defining the attribute varia
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 03:48:55PM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This currently works in Pugs:
> >
> > for [1..10].pairs -> Pair $x { say $x.value }
> >
> > But this does not:
> >
> > for [1..10].pairs -> $x { say $x.value }
> >
> > Be
10 matches
Mail list logo
