Surely there is a
viable alternative that doesn't involve outlawing it?
Aankhen
people squirm every time I change my mind.
Well, you've certainly got everyone flustered enough that they'll be
overjoyed even if you pick the alternative they hated the most... :-)
Aankhen
};
Shouldn't that `CATCH` block be within the `atomic` block? Or did I
miss something?
Aankhen
[sorry Luke, I hit "Send" too soon]
On 7/27/05, Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There is probably a better word than "contains". I was thinking set
> > theory when I came up with that one.
What about "derives"?
Aankhen
On 7/29/05, Flavio S. Glock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is "for =" only for filehandles? I tried:
No, it's for anything that supports iteration... `=$foo` ==
`$foo.next()`, if I recall correctly. It's probably not yet
implemented.
Aankhen
you check if something is a ref? `if (tied($foo))`?
Aankhen
pecify an unflattened array or a hash in a sub call
without any special syntax...
Aankhen
ll it the wtf operator.
No, please... how about just calling it the interrobang operator
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang>? :-D
Aankhen
On 23 Feb 2006 14:15:21 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Log:
> Typo, plus audrey forgot to increment version.
There seems to be another typo on the same line: "just as method like"
instead of "just as methods like".
Aankhen
--
"Why don't you go on a diet!"
"Because I like to eat! Is that a crime?"
g into
your code.
--
Aankhen
(We have no branches.)
identifies this message object. May be undef as long as the message
is begin composed.");
.has $content_type = 'text/plain';
}
--
Aankhen
(We have no branches.)
few other minor changes. As for XHTML 2.0,
that's still a long way off. :-)
--
Aankhen
(We have no branches.)
o ~~ m/$bar := (bar|baz)/;
Now $bar will contain either "bar" or "baz", depending on which one was matched.
Hope this is helpful. Corrections are welcome from anyone who spots
any mistakes.
Aankhen
13 matches
Mail list logo
