HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
Sure, that one might be obvious, but quick, tell me what these mean:
say .bar
say .()
say .1
when .bar
when .()
when .1
foo .bar
foo .()
foo .1
.foo .bar
.foo .()
.foo .1
I'd rather have a rule you don't have to think abo
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 7 11:53:34 2006
New Revision: 8607
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
Reduce now defined directly in terms of list operators, possibly autogenerated.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
=
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 7 12:26:35 2006
New Revision: 8608
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Simplified postfix/infix parsing policy to use "long dot".
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==
--- doc
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 05:36:56PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: On 3/27/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > The p5-to-p6 translator will turn
: >
: > local $x;
: >
: > into
: >
: > temp undefine $x;
:
: Are you sure that that's not:
:
: undefine temp $x;
:
: It seems to me t
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 7 13:04:37 2006
New Revision: 8609
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
More long dot cleanup.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod(or
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:04:38PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: +The long dot form of the C<...> postfix is C<0. ...> rather than
: +C<0. > because the long dot eats the first dot after the whitespace.
: +It does not follow that you can write C<0> because that would
: +take the first t
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:11:15PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:04:38PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : +The long dot form of the C<...> postfix is C<0. ...> rather than
> : +C<0. > because the long dot eats the first dot after the whitespace.
> : +It does not foll
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 10:07:55PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
: On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:11:15PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:04:38PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: > : +The long dot form of the C<...> postfix is C<0. ...> rather than
: > : +C<0. > because the
Okay, after attempting and failing to take a nap, I think I know what's
bugging me about "long dot". It seems just a little too specific.
So here's another proposal. We've been saying forever that we don't
need start/stop comments. But maybe, just maybe, if they also cure the
delayed postfix pr
Delimiter-terminated quotes. Really nice idea.
I'd put the dot inside the comment: "#.x", with x being an optional
quote delimiter (excluding dots). If a delimiter is included, the
comment is terminated by the matching quote delimiter; if absent, the
comment is terminated by the next dot.
$x#
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 06:31:44PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Delimiter-terminated quotes. Really nice idea.
>
> I'd put the dot inside the comment: "#.x", with x being an optional
> quote delimiter (excluding dots). If a delimiter is included, the
> comment is terminated by the matching quot
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> But if one is going to go this route (and I'm not sure that we should),
> then when the delimiter is absent have the comment terminate at
> the first non-whitespace character.
...which makes "#.\s" good only for inserting whitespace where it
normally wouldn't belong. O
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> Okay, after attempting and failing to take a nap, I think I know
LW> what's bugging me about "long dot". It seems just a little too
LW> specific.
does this mean you are at the dawning of your dot.age?
i couldn't resist! :)
uri
-
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 7 19:15:01 2006
New Revision: 8610
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Embedded comments are much more generally useful than long dots, especially
when formatted to look good as a pseudo .method call.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
===
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:00:29PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> > Jonathan wrote:
> > > If a delimiter is included, the
> > > comment is terminated by the matching quote delimiter; if absent, the
> > > comment is terminated by the next dot.
> >
> > But if one is going t
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 06:31:44PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Delimiter-terminated quotes. Really nice idea.
:
: I'd put the dot inside the comment: "#.x", with x being an optional
: quote delimiter (excluding dots). If a delimiter is included, the
: comment is terminated by the matching quot
Larry Wall wrote:
> I really prefer the form where .#() looks like a no-op method call,
> and can provide the visual dot for a postfix extender.
Although inline and multiline comments are very likely to be used in
situations where method calls simply aren't appropriate:
.#(+---+
| Hello! |
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 08:11:04PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > I really prefer the form where .#() looks like a no-op method call,
: > and can provide the visual dot for a postfix extender.
:
: Although inline and multiline comments are very likely to be used in
: situation
Larry Wall wrote:
> It's only a problem when some tries to write
>
> .=#( ... :-)
[tries to grok the meaning of "$foo.=#(Hello, World!)"]
[fails]
> : All true. But it avoids the headache of figuring out whether "..#" is
> : supposed to parse as a double-dot followed by a line-gobbling commen
19 matches
Mail list logo
