Re: Temporal changes

On Feb 23, 2009, at 3:56 PM, mark.a.big...@comcast.net wrote: Instant Moment Point PointInTime Timestamp Event Jiffy Time Juncture

S28

The official Perl6 Documentation site list this document as special-names not special-variables variables is more constrictive, so suggest a change in name of pod. pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: Author: wayland Date: 2009-02-23 04:47:22 +0100 (Mon, 23 Feb 2009

Rules mentioned in specifications, etc

Here is a list of rules (see below) that are spread around the language design documents, but which lack a home in which they are systematically canonically defined. I suggest they be added to the new S28 (which is possible if S28 is special-names, not special-variables) Richard Where can

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

Em Seg, 2009-02-23 às 19:49 -0800, Larry Wall escreveu: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:01:40PM +1300, Martin D Kealey wrote: > : Conceptually I think they should all go in add-on(s), however I suspect that > : when an exception is thrown inside a signal handler, cleanly unwinding the > : call chain w

Re: Temporal changes

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Graham Barr wrote: > Juncture As has already been pointed out, that has extremely high potential for being confused with Junctions. -- Mark J. Reed

"$!foo mapped to $foo", say what?

I read this line in S02, and was distraught: $!foo object attribute private storage (mapped to $foo though) I read this as meaning "when you declare $!foo, you will then also be able to refer to it as $foo". Jonathan Worthington pointed out on #perl6 that S12 says the exact opposite:

r25523 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-24 17:02:03 +0100 (Tue, 24 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25523 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod Log: remove confusing sidenote Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.po

Re: Rules mentioned in specifications, etc

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 02:04:05PM +0300, Richard Hainsworth wrote: > Here is a list of rules (see below) that are spread around the language > design documents, but which lack a home in which they are systematically > canonically defined. > > I suggest they be added to the new S28 (which is po

Re: min= (from "Rakudo Built-ins Can Now Be Written In Perl 6")

David Green wrote: my $foo is limited(100..200); $foo = 5; # really does $foo = 100 Where does that MySQ smell come from? Why not undef (or NaN)? -- Ruud

Re: min= (from "Rakudo Built-ins Can Now Be Written In Perl 6")

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote: > David Green wrote: > >>    my $foo is limited(100..200); >>    $foo = 5;                       # really does $foo = 100 > > Where does that MySQ smell come from? > Why not undef (or NaN)? How about Failing instead of any of the above?

Re: "$!foo mapped to $foo", say what?

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:49:24PM +0100, Carl Mäsak wrote: : I read this line in S02, and was distraught: : : $!foo object attribute private storage (mapped to $foo though) : : I read this as meaning "when you declare $!foo, you will then also be : able to refer to it as $foo". : : Jo

Re: min= (from "Rakudo Built-ins Can Now Be Written In Perl 6")

Alternately, if you want a purer FP solution: sub infix: is looser(&infix:<..>) (Num $x, Range $r) { given $x { when $x < $r.min { $r.min } when $x > $r.max { $r.max } default { $x } } } ... take $foo clamp 100..200;

r25527 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-24 19:23:06 +0100 (Tue, 24 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25527 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S06-routines.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S28-special-variables.pod Log: clarify what happens when associativity conflicts arise allow both tighter and l

r25528 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: rhr Date: 2009-02-24 19:33:56 +0100 (Tue, 24 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25528 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S28-special-variables.pod Log: [S28] we don't have both $*IN and $*STDIN etc. Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S28-special-variables.pod ==

Re: min= (from "Rakudo Built-ins Can Now Be Written In Perl 6")

On 2009-Feb-23, at 11:30 pm, Carl Mäsak wrote: For what it's worth, I write a lot of Perl 6, and I'm already used to it. OK. Of course, you might be smarter than the average coder, but I agree it's not a huge deal. On 2009-Feb-24, at 9:29 am, Mark J. Reed wrote: On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:54:44PM -0600, Chris Dolan wrote: > On Feb 23, 2009, at 11:16 PM, Larry Wall wrote: > >> if $x ~~ $y ± $epsilon {...} >> >> where infix:<±> turns the single value into a range for the >> smartmatch. > > > That's very cool. However, my first impression is that "$y ±

Re: min= (from "Rakudo Built-ins Can Now Be Written In Perl 6")

On Tuesday, 24. February 2009 07:30:05 Carl Mäsak wrote: > >    my $foo is limited(100..200); > >    $foo = 5;                       # really does $foo = 100 > > Sounds like a good idea for a CPAN module. You can already do > something similar with the subset keyword, though: > > subset Percentage

r25529 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-24 20:58:11 +0100 (Tue, 24 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25529 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S06-routines.pod Log: initial whack at describing how settings are snapshotted and how they interact with invocation of MAIN for settings that want to i

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

Larry Wall wrote: > So it might be better as a (very tight?) operator, regardless of > the spelling: > >    $x ~~ $y within $epsilon I like this: it's readable and intuitive. As well, it leaves ± available for use in its mathematical sense. > For what it's worth, ± does happen to be in Latin-1,

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

Em Ter, 2009-02-24 às 08:59 -0800, Larry Wall escreveu: > I'm using ± more in the engineering sense than the mathematical > sense. What about... if $x ~~ [..] $x ± $epsilon {...} That would mean that $x ± $epsilon in list context returned each value, where in scalar context returned a junctio

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Tuesday, 24. February 2009 17:59:31 Larry Wall wrote: > So it might be better as a (very tight?) operator, regardless of > the spelling: > > $x ~~ $y within $epsilon This is a pretty add-on to smartmatch but I still think we are wasting a valueable slot in the smartmatch table by making num

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 12:31 -0800, Jon Lang wrote: > $y ± 5 # same as ($y - 5) | ($y + 5) > $y within 5 # same as ($y - 5) .. ($y + 5) Oh, that's just beautiful. -'f

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

Daniel Ruoso wrote: > What about... > >  if $x ~~ [..] $x ± $epsilon {...} > > That would mean that $x ± $epsilon in list context returned each value, > where in scalar context returned a junction, so the reduction operator > could do its job... (I'm assuming that you meant something like "if $y ~

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

Em Ter, 2009-02-24 às 13:34 -0800, Jon Lang escreveu: > Daniel Ruoso wrote: > > if $y ~~ [..] $x ± $epsilon {...} > Junctions should not return individual values in list context, It is not the junction that is returning the individual values, but the infix:<±> operator... daniel

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

TSa wrote: > Larry Wall wrote: >> So it might be better as a (very tight?) operator, regardless of >> the spelling: >> >>     $x ~~ $y within $epsilon > > This is a pretty add-on to smartmatch but I still think > we are wasting a valueable slot in the smartmatch table > by making numeric $x ~~ $y s

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > Em Ter, 2009-02-24 às 13:34 -0800, Jon Lang escreveu: >> Daniel Ruoso wrote: >> >  if $y ~~ [..] $x ± $epsilon {...} >> Junctions should not return individual values in list context, > > It is not the junction that is returning the individual

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

Thinking about what I actually do. . . A near equal test of a float ought to be a fractional error based on the current value of the float. $x tested for between $a*(1.0 + $errorfraction) and $a*(1.0 - $errorfraction) If you're dealing with propagation of errors during processing of data th

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

Doug McNutt wrote: > Thinking about what I actually do. . . > > A near equal test of a float ought to be a fractional error based on the > current value of the float. > > $x  tested for between $a*(1.0 + $errorfraction) and $a*(1.0 - > $errorfraction) > > If you're dealing with propagation of error

S14 markup

Someone should go through the Parametric Roles section and properly indent the code blocks. They're not rendering properly at http://perlcabal.org/syn/S14.html -- Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang

r25536 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-25 02:58:36 +0100 (Wed, 25 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25536 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S14-roles-and-parametric-types.pod Log: indent examples Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S14-roles-and-parametric-types.pod =

Re: Synopsis for Signatures?

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Larry Wall wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:24:14AM -0800, Jon Lang wrote: > : Given that signatures have grown well beyond their origins as > : subroutine parameter lists, and given that signatures have their own > : syntax, perhaps they should be moved out of

r25538 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: wayland Date: 2009-02-25 04:48:08 +0100 (Wed, 25 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25538 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod Log: Added Predefined Metasyntax section, as per richard++ Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod ===

Re: Rules mentioned in specifications, etc

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Larry Wall wrote: On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 02:04:05PM +0300, Richard Hainsworth wrote: Here is a list of rules (see below) that are spread around the language design documents, but which lack a home in which they are systematically canonically defined. I suggest they be add

Re: r25490 - docs/Perl6/Spec

On 2009 Feb 22, at 22:47, pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: +$?PUGS_VERSION # Pugs version (not canonical) +$*PUGS_HAS_HSPLUGINS # True if Pugs was compiled with support for hsplugins + # (not canonical) These should not be part of the standard. But while

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:54:35PM -0800, Jon Lang wrote: : Half-baked idea here: could we somehow use some dwimmery akin to : Whatever magic to provide some meaning to a postfix:<%> operator? : Something so that you could say: : : $x within 5% : : And it would translate it to: : : $x within

Re: r25490 - docs/Perl6/Spec

On 2009 Feb 23, at 22:43, Timothy S. Nelson wrote: On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, jason switzer wrote: On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 9:47 PM, wrote: +$*PROGRAM_NAME # name of the program being executed How does this differ from $*EXECUTABLE_NAME? Good question. Anyone? I would assume $*PRO

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Daniel Ruoso wrote: These signal events will presumably be processed by some kind of underlying event handler that mediates among any and all user-visible event handlers within the process. Now *that* made my eyes shine. ;) I'm in favour of discussing this idea t

Re: Temporal changes

On 2009 Feb 23, at 8:34, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote: Martin D Kealey wrote: Ah, we want a noun that isn't readily confused as an adjective. Suitable terms might include: Instant Jiffy Juncture Moment Occasion Snap Tick ... Once :) "Then"? -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,hask

Re: r25490 - docs/Perl6/Spec

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: On 2009 Feb 23, at 22:43, Timothy S. Nelson wrote: On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, jason switzer wrote: On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 9:47 PM, wrote: +$*PROGRAM_NAME # name of the program being executed How does this differ from $*EXECUTABLE_NAME?

AnyEvent

Am I right in guessing that the AnyEvent stuff should go in S17 ? :) - | Name: Tim Nelson | Because the Creator is,| | E-mail: wayl...@wayland.id.au| I am |

@*INPLACE_AUTOSPLIT_FIELDS

In the table I'm assembling, the following entry was added: Perl 5 Perl 6 Comment --- ------ @F @*INPLACE_AUTOSPLIT_FIELDS ..or some such Can I just speak in favour of retaining the @F name? My

r25539 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-02-25 06:19:17 +0100 (Wed, 25 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25539 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod Log: document which assertions are on the endangered list Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod === --

Re: Signals question for S16: IPC / IO / Signals

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Daniel Ruoso wrote: Em Seg, 2009-02-23 às 19:49 -0800, Larry Wall escreveu: On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 04:01:40PM +1300, Martin D Kealey wrote: : Conceptually I think they should all go in add-on(s), however I suspect that : when an exception is thrown inside a signal handler,

r25540 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: wayland Date: 2009-02-25 06:31:24 +0100 (Wed, 25 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25540 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S16-io.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S28-special-names.pod Log: S16: Added some information about signal processing. S28: Pushed the Perl5 to Perl6 special variable translation table as f

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Jon Lang wrote: > $y ± 5 # same as ($y - 5) | ($y + 5) > $y within 5 # same as ($y - 5) .. ($y + 5) I suspect that we're running against Huffman here, given the likely usage -- ranges *should* be used at pretty much every floating point "equality" test, whereas "any(-

Re: r25490 - docs/Perl6/Spec

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: + $* and $# have been deprecated half of forever and are gone. $[ + is a fossil that I suppose could turn into an evil pragma, if we + try to translate it at all. (Frees up * twigil for $*FOO syntax.) I'm not even sure this makes sense to

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, I wrote: > $y + ±5 # same as ($y - 5) | ($y + 5) (also same as $y - ±5) > $y ± 5# same as ($y - 5) .. ($y + 5) A further question: should such ranges be [closed], (open) or [half-open)? I would argue for half-open because then exactly one of a set of consecutive r

r25541 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: wayland Date: 2009-02-25 07:08:52 +0100 (Wed, 25 Feb 2009) New Revision: 25541 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S28-special-names.pod Log: S28: Incorporated some more stuff from the old documentation lower down, and a few variables from S02. Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S28-special-names.po

S28 update?

Is there any chance someone could have a look at the stuff in the section labelled "Old stuff for p5/p6 comparison" of S28, and give me some info on what's going on with them? In particular, I want to know: - What's going to replace $^V / $PERL_VERSION / $] -- is it $?PERL ? - Wh

Re: Comparing inexact values (was "Re: Temporal changes")

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 07:03:27PM +1300, Martin D Kealey wrote: : On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, I wrote: : > $y + ±5 # same as ($y - 5) | ($y + 5) (also same as $y - ±5) : > $y ± 5# same as ($y - 5) .. ($y + 5) That seems a little cheesy to me. : A further question: should such ranges be [clo