At 02:08 PM 8/1/00 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 06:59 PM 8/1/00 +0100, Hildo Biersma wrote:
>
>>Can you imagine doing this for 'local'? That would lead to some pretty
>>neat obfuscated code...
>
>Sure. long_distance($var, -1) could give the most-recently-localized
>version of $var. :-)
>
>I'd
At 10:55 AM 8/2/00 -0400, Michael Mathews wrote:
>I am prone to agree with this. I would be willing to promote the requirement
>of starting and ending multiline comments on their own line. Maybe something
>like this (this will not work in Perl 5):
>
>code to execute
>=#
>some
>comments to
>ignore
At 08:14 AM 8/3/00 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >True, but maybe a lower precedance keword is needed like we did
> >or || and &&. I think someone suggested "then"
>
> > print $string1, $string2, "\n" then return 3 if $cond;
>
> >then again, maybe not.
>
>Why not just piss everybody off?
>
>
At 04:56 AM 8/4/00 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> > > What about '$me'? It ties in nicely with 'my' (although perhaps
> f
> > > wrong reasons), it's half as much typing as 'self' or 'this' and we get
> > > to annoy both sets of religious zealots at once. :-)=
>
> >You took the words ri
At 02:17 PM 8/4/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>I'm with Chaim on this one. One of the things I *love* about perl is
>that it doesn't constrain me to a particular paradigm and moreover it
>almost naturally supports other paradigms (like functional
>programming). I'm always touting this as
At 01:11 PM 8/3/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>BTW, I propose that RFCs have a Status: field as part of the VERSION.
>Here are some possible values that I can see:
>
>Status: accepted # we all agree that it should go in
>Status: rejected # we all agree that it shouldn't go in
>Stat
that's the problem. If we just wanted to change
the value "here", we could use my(). The problem is that local()
changes the value for somewhere else as well as here. Other names
suggested (like "shadow", or "mask") convey that idea better than
"here".
&g
At 05:33 PM 8/11/00 +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 11, 2000 at 03:36:21PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> > This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> > http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
> >
> > =head1 TITLE
> >
> > Builtin: partition
> >
> > =head1 VERSION
> >
> > Maintainer: Jeremy
At 11:52 AM 8/11/00 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > s/gmt/ut/
>
> > IIRC GMT got obsoleted in the 70s by UT (Universal Time).
>
>Officially called UTC, so utcdate would be a better name I think.
UT and UTC are different scales, ref: http://tycho.usn
There has been some discussion recently about lazy-evaluated semi-infinite
lists. The biggest point of disagreement is over lists of the form (..n)
and (..), i.e., semi-infinite lists bounded from above and semi-infinite
lists which are unbounded.
I believe there are some reasonable semantics
> Buddha Buck wrote:
> > Or... Let's say you had a 3x3 array implemented as follows:
> >
> > @array = ( a1, a2, a3,
> > b1, b2, b3,
> > c1, c2, c3 );
> >
> > unzip(3,@array) would return the columns.
> > partit
July 1st, whichever is
closer.
Leap-seconds are a PITA for generic time routines.
>
>
>
--
Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our
liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the
);
$myfoo->foo = 1;
print "(foo,bar,bat) = ($myfoo->foo,$myfoo->bar,$myfoo->bat)\n";
# prints "(foo,bar,bat) = (1,1.6180339887,2.6180339887)
print 1/$myfoo->bar; #prints "0.6180339887"
$myfoo->bar = 2; #error -- $myfoo->bar is not an lvalue
Does that example m
> Chaim Frenkel Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183
--
Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our
liberty depends upon
ltiple arrays, or multiple hashes.
>
> sub foo :lvalue(Dog $fido, int @array, %hash) {}
>
> foo() = ($name, 0..10, %bar);
>
>
>
> >>>>> "BB" == Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> BB> sub foo : lvalue($newval) {
> BB> # $newv
At 10:37 AM 8/16/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >>>>> "BB" == Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>BB> If we have to pick and epoch in an OS-neutral way, I think I for one
>BB> would be happy with something like this in the docs for the
At 04:14 PM 8/16/00 +0100, Andy Wardley wrote:
>On Aug 16, 9:06am, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > Passing the lvalue via some other means eliminates this problem. I
> > forget who suggested it (Buddha Buck?) but
> >
> > sub foo : lvalue($value) { ... }
>
>
At 04:11 PM 8/22/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Casey R. Tweten wrote:
> >
> > There is no documentation that states:
> >
> > ``keys() just doesn't work on lists and/or arrays,
>
>Why should it bother saying that, when it already says keys() works on a
>HASH?
>
>Or is there some confusion that a H
At 09:37 AM 8/23/00 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Dan Sugalski writes:
>: What I've been hoping for is:
>:
>: 1) The ability to dump the program and its current state out into something
>: that can be reloaded later. (Though filehandles and other
>: external-interface things make this tricky)
>:
>: 2)
> Buddha Buck wrote:
>
> > Perhaps someone should RFC the new special variable &ME, which is
> > predefined to be the whole program. Who knows? Perhaps it would then make
> > sense to use @_ at the top level, as if the program was invoked as
> > "&
ts of the matrix @a, each point being a reference
to a 4-element list of integers.
>
>
> Michael
> --
> Administrator www.shoebox.net
> Programmer, System Administrator www.gallanttech.com
> --
--
Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTE
At 05:52 PM 8/30/00 +0100, raptor wrote:
>hi,
>
>We now can say :
>
>$x = 10 if $y > 12;
>
>It will be good if this also work.( i.e. block before if ).
>
>{$x =10; $z =15} if $y > 12;
do {$x = 10; $z = 15} if $y > 12;
works.
>or
>
>$x =10, $z =15 if $y > 12; # 8 click shorter
Should work now.
t;<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< @<<<<<<< @<<<<<<<<<
$qty, $partid, $desc{$partid}, $price{$partid}, $qty*$$price{$partid}
.
and wondering why all their inv
At 01:35 PM 8/31/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 07:59:31PM +0200, Dan Zetterstrom wrote:
> > Why not use the "function" we already got, tr? Something like:
> >
> > tr///l # Translate only _l_eading characters matching.
> > tr///t # Translate only _t_raili
At 03:40 PM 9/1/00 +0200, Gael Pegliasco wrote:
> >
> > Arrays are ordered.
> > Hashes are not.
> > Neither are sets.
> >
> > Arrays can have repetitions.
> > Hashes can not.
> > Neither can sets.
> >
> > etc.
> >
> > --tom
>
>
>Yes, this is true, but the natural syntax, fo
At 05:35 PM 8/31/00 +, David L. Nicol wrote:
>Buddha Buck wrote:
> > > The array
> > > syntax would also be useful in multi-dimensional arrays.
> >
> > That is if multi-dimensional arrays are implemented as lists-of-lists,
> > which they might not be.
&g
At 12:50 PM 9/6/00 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
>I see barewords as being whatever the programmer wants them to be,
>as long as he makes it clear what he expects the word to be before using
>it.
>
>So, C becomes a legacy constructor and the perl6 version of it would
>be something like
>
>
>
At 07:29 AM 9/19/00 -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
> I guess, if I had to write an explanation of pack/unpack based on
>my limited understanding, it would be something like:
>
> "Unpack takes binary data in some particular format and
>disassembles it, assigning various pieces of it to v
At 02:39 AM 9/21/00 -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
>Thanks, Paris, for your intervention, although I fear it was too late.
>
>Well, since Tom claims to have put me in his kill file, he may never see
>this. But for the record...
>
>Tom Christiansen wrote:
>
> > >Can't we all just play nice?
> >
> >
At 03:35 PM 9/27/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Piers Cawley wrote:
> >
> > You know, I'm trying to see what's annoying about all those
> > parentheses in the lisp function and what do you know, I can't see
> > anything wrong. Okay, so it's not Perl syntax, but it's still clear
> > what's going on.
At 08:36 AM 10/4/00 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > =head1 TITLE
> >
> > Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD
>
> > =head1 VERSION
> >
> > Status: Frozen
>
>I'm sorry, I was gonna bite my lip, but I've gotta say: Freezing RFC's
>like this when the following is true:
>
> > A lot of
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:11:12PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > I personally would rather that perl 6 handle perl 6 code only, and leave
> > > the compilation and interpretation of perl 5 code to perl 5.
> >
> > FWIW, I agre
Edward Peschko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > beautiful. Then extending this is simple, consistent, easy to read,
> > > compatible with perl5..
> >
> > I'm not sure that that was the point I was trying to make.
> > If nothing else, the '.' would then be responsible for *three*
> > different
Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote:
> So why not
>
> $object!method("foo", "bar");
In my opinion, because it doesn't provide sufficient visual
distinction between $object and method(). At a glance, especially on
a crowded p
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 15:52:47 -0600 (MDT), Dan Brian wrote:
> > > So why not
> > >
> >
Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 26 Apr 2001 23:19:49 -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
>
> >$bar = [$obj method() ]; # method call
>
> $bar = method $obj()
>
> would be more consistent with perl's current
>
> $object = new Cla
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > How about borr
At 03:00 PM 05-04-2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:51:53AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > And btw . . . Wouldn't
> >
> > $thing has property
> >
> > make more sense than
> >
> > $thing is property
>
>"$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true"
At 10:49 AM 05-04-2001 -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
>From: Buddha Buck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > At 03:00 PM 05-04-2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > >On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:51:53AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > > > And btw . . . Wouldn't
> &
At 07:44 PM 04-23-2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
>Hm, I would expect @() in a scalar context to give the
>same result as
>
> @tmp = @(...); $x = @tmp;
>
>That is, yeild the number of elements in the list.
I can see this. But unless there is a good reason, that seems like a
less-than-optimal
At 08:10 PM 05-14-2001 +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 01:56:01PM -0500, Me wrote:
> > > Hm, OK. What does this access and using what method ?
> > >
> > > $foo = '1.2';
> > > @bar[$foo];
> >
> > This is an argument against conflating @ and %.
>
>No it is not.
>
> > It has no
On 10/23/06, Markus Laire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/23/06, Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Markus Laire writes:
>
> > Does anyone know if programming languages are protected by copyright
> > or not?
>
> Code can be copyrighted; ideas can't be.
Yes, but the syntax of the programming
Keep in mind that I am only an egg, and I am putting my intuition and
experience with similar languages to mind. Perl6 might be doing
things differently than I expect.
On 11/22/06, Anatoly Vorobey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To add some more confusion to what Yuval wrote:
In general, it doesn't
On 11/22/06, Anatoly Vorobey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First of all, thanks a lot for your comments.
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 06:43:12PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
> >{
> > my $x = something();
> > if $x==1 {
> >...code...
> > }
> >}
> >
Sorry to reply to the wrong comment, but I lost the original thread in
my mail archives and didn't notice this until now.
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:54 PM, John M. Dlugosz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote:
>
> >
> > The fundamental flaw of metric mmd is th
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Jon Lang wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:52 AM, John Macdonald wrote:
>> Yep, I've done that.
>>
>> But comparing the difference in effort between:
>>
>> - press a key
>> - Google for a web page that has the right character set, cut, refocus, paste
>>
>> means
Resending to list
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> I had some thoughts lately about the Perl 6 operators, and wanted to bounce
> some ideas.
>
>
>
> Secondly, regarding the Bool type, I think it would be useful for Perl 6 to
> define the full complement of dyad
Resent to list as I intended to in the first place
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 9:32 PM, Darren Duncan wrote:
> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>>
>> A few months ago (or maybe more) I proposed making pathnames their own
>> type, distinct from (or perhas a subclass of) strings, but easily
>> constructed from st
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Forrest Sheng Bao wrote:
> Oh, I mean both Perl 5 and Perl 6. I couldn't find proper list to ask this
> question. So I asked in this list.
I'm not sure perl6-language is the proper place to be asking about the
time-complexity of hashes in Perl6, or at least, not th
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> The biggest difference proposed by the use of TAI is that when you ask
> for the number of seconds between "2008-12-31T23:59:59+" and
> "2009-01-01T00:00:00+" you'll get 2 because of the leap second. But
> you don't need to know how ma
Originally sent to Austin alone by accident
Austin Hastings wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Lang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
role A {has Cat $.x;}
role B {has Dog $.x;}
class Foo {does Cat; does Dog;}
my Foo $bar;
$bar.x; # Is this a Cat or a Dog?
If, however, two roles try
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:11:02 +0100, The Perl 6 Summarizer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-09-17
>Another week, another summary, and I'm running late. So:
>
> This week in perl6-compiler
>
> Bootstrapping the grammar
>Uri Guttman had some thoughts
At 01:34 PM 05-18-2001 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>Dammit, I got the example exactly backwards. Try this:
>
> >$Foo is true;
> >$Foo = 0;
> >print "Stuff" if $Foo; # *WOULD* print - "is" assigns a
> > # permanent "true" property
> >
> >$Foo as
Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Let it be.
>
> Not a flame, but a suggestion:
>
> let $pi be constant;
Personally, I'd rather save let for:
(let ($x,$y,$z,...) = (1,2,3,...) in { ... })
which would be equivilant to:
((sub {my ($x,$y,$z,...) = @_; ... })(1,2,3,...))
Many fu
At 06:54 PM 05-30-2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 12:38:50PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> > while pseudocoding something I realized that it would be really
> > cool if there was another magical default shelf, like $_ or _ but
> > subtly different, that stores, if l
At 03:07 PM 07-09-2001 -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 02:36:17PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > > Don't laugh. It's here now. It's called XSLT. :-)
> >
> > Um, that's not what the article was talking about The proposal is to use
> >
At 03:55 PM 07-09-2001 -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 03:48:27PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > Why can't a general-purpose programming language be augmented with XML for
> > internal documentation purposes?
>
>You mean like C#? :-)
I wasn't sp
At 01:01 PM 08-01-2001 -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
>I was just wondering if there will be any solution for the circular
>refernece memory leak (I guess you can call it a problem). Can't we keep
>information on the number of circular references in the SV structure and
>then decrement the references
As a necrohipposadist (beater of dead horses), I'll add...
"Sterin, Ilya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well guess not, since something like this...
>
> {
> my ($a, $b, $c);
>
> $a = \$b;
> $b = \$c;
> $c = \$a;
> }
>
> would definitelly be hard, resource consuming to implement a circ
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Okay, I'm whipping together the "fancy math" section of the interpreter
> assembly language. I've got:
> Can anyone think of things I've forgotten? It's been a while since I've
> done numeric work.
Uri mentioned exp(x) = e^x, but I think if you are
At 11:40 AM 01-25-2002 -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff you wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:43:07 -0500, Damian Conway wrote:
> >
> > >What we're cleaning up is the ickiness of having things declared outside
> > >the braces be lexical to th
like:
macro let (%&)
{ &(sub { my qs(keys @_[0]) = @_; return qs(@_[1]); })(qs(values @_[1]))};
I'm not sure that that would work perfectly offhand (I suspect some
syntax tweaking would be necessary) but it's the basic idea I think
you are going for.
--
Buddha Buck
At 07:57 AM 04-03-2002 -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
>Mark J. Reed writes:
>: loop (my $i=0; 1; $i++) {
>:
>
>No, the scope of $i stays outside, per the previous decision. If you
>want it inside you can always make $i an official formal parameter:
>
> for 0 .. Inf -> $i { ... }
>
>I t
At 05:51 PM 04-16-2002 +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
>Also known as constructs you wish you hadn't discovered.
>
>So, I'm reading through Finkel and I came across the following, which
>computes the greatest common divisor of a and b (recast into perl6ish
>syntax)
>
> while {
> when $a < $b { $b
At 08:58 AM 04-23-2002 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Precedence is set with the "like' property:
>
> my sub operator:now ($a,$b) is like("but") is inline { $a but $b }
> sub operator:also ($a,$b) is like("and") is inline { $a and $b }
OK, but that limits you to the, um, 24 standard levels of
At 01:12 PM 04-23-2002 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>24 levels of precedence should be enough, else you can always resort to
>parens.
I would have agreed, except that I would have also said that the 14
precedence levels of C should be enough as well -- yet we seem to have
discovered uses f
At 09:45 AM 04-26-2002 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Tim Bunce writes:
>: For perl at least I thought Larry has said that you'll be able to
>: create new ops but only give them the same precedence as any one
>: of the existing ops.
>
>Close, but not quite. What I think I said was that you can't speci
At 01:10 PM 05-21-2002 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-05-21 at 12:57, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> > Here's an easier one: backslash followed by the delimiter is that thing.
> > Everything else is literal.
> >
> > print 'c:\it\'s\easier\to\write\win32\paths\this\way';
> > print
At 11:31 AM 06-06-2002 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
>#Preliminary Perl6::Regex
># This does not have any actions, but otherwise I think is correct.
># Let me know if it's right or not.
I'm not a regex guru, but...
>use 6;
>
>grammar Perl6::Regex {
> rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>no strict 'refs';
>> my Date $date;
>> $date .= 'Sep 21, 1963';
>>
>>There is a method name there--'Date::Sep 21, 1963'.
>
>
> But that's my point. You wouldn't have to put the method name or the
class
> be
Trey Harris wrote:
> In a message dated Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Buddha Buck writes:
>
>>I suspect that, if it makes sense to say
>>
>>$foo = &$date.method;
>>
>>then it would also make sense to say
>>
>>$date .= $foo;
>>
>>as well.
>
Peter Haworth wrote:
> That *is* a logical weakening. Just because the inherited precondition is
> C<< x > 10 >>, doesn't mean that the weakened condition has to be of the form
> C<< x > 9 >> or any other value lower than 10. C<< a || b >> is weaker than
> C<< a >>
So what we are looking at is s
I was wondering...
How persistant are superpositions? How pervasive are they?
I mean, will the following work?
$letters = any('a'..'z');
$digits = any('0'..'9');
$ndaTable = {
start => { $letters => 'OneLetter',
$digits => 'OneDigit' }
OneLetter => { $letters
Larry Wall wrote:
Maybe we should just say that you can put it anywhere that makes sense,
and let the perl parser sort out the sheep from the goats. The basic
rule is that for any op, [op] is also expected in the same place. So
if the user defines a postfix:! for factorial, they automatically g
Here's my current understanding of what's under discussion for for-loops:
Larry wants to eliminate the ; from the RHS of the ->, so the only thing
for needs to know about the RHS is the number and types of the
arguments. This puts the specification about how to generate those
arguments on the
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 12:54:12PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2002-11-06 at 11:43:20, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ >= 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 <= $_ < 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[gre
Piers Cawley wrote:
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Will there be some shorter-hand way to say these?
@a = @grades[grep $_ >= 90, @grades];
@b = @grades[grep 80 <= $_ < 90, @grades];
@c = @grades[grep 70 <= $_ < 80, @grades];
Granted, it's fairly compact as it is but I'm wo
Luke Palmer wrote:
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 13:49:14 -0700 (MST)
X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 20:48:50 +1100
From: Damian Conway <
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 05:30:00PM +0100, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 03:04:16PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 08:22:17PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
The name of the property is still under debate. Larry favours:
sub square
Hey Damian...
What is the expected output of this:
my $x = 0|1; my $xsum = 0; my $xmean;
my $y = 0|1;
my $z = $x * $y; my $zsum = 0; my $zmean;
$xsum += $x.pick for 1..1000;
$xmean = $xsum / 1000;
print "Expected value of \$x is $xmean\n";
$zsum = $z.pick for 1..1000;
$zmean =
Dave Whipp wrote:
"Michael Lazzaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
After thinking about it a little more, I'll set myself on the "yes"
side. And propose either '===' or ':=:' to do it.
Definitely '==='.
I could also see :== or =:= as well.
If we have
$obj1 = $obj2;
then presumably, ($obj1
(resent as requested)
James Mastros wrote:
Here's my basic defintion of ID: Two things should have the same ID
if-and-only-if they will behave exactly the same, now and forevermore.
Thus, there should be one ID for all constants of the same value, which
is different from all constants of diff
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
I think this is one (rare) case where an UPPERCASE or unusual name might
not be a bad idea, so it will BRING ATTENTION to the fact that you're
using a unusual method.
$obj.ID;
$obj.IDENTITY;
If don't think we'll have much of a chance at teaching people to
_alwa
Luke Palmer wrote:
I would, from the descriptions, imagine that:
@keep <~ grep /good/ <~ @list ~> grep /bad!/ ~> @throw;
Would parse as:
@keep <~ grep /good/ <~ @list;
@list ~> grep /bad!/ ~> @throw;
Nope. <~ and ~> only *rearrange* arguments, so if you only type @list
once, you can only
Dave Whipp wrote:
Something else springs to mind. Consider the C syntax:
for 1,2,3 ~> foo -> $a { ... }
Is there any way we could unify these two operators without creating
ambiguities? If we
could, then using straight arrows would be nicer to type than the squiggly
ones.
I think I see what
Mr. Nobody wrote:
Unicode operators in the core are a very, very, very, very, very, very, very,
very, very, very, very, very, very bad idea.
We've already had this discussion. We wouldn't be bringing up using
unicode operators for this function if we hadn't already talked about
unicode oper
Mr. Nobody wrote:
If you and Damian think you'll get me to leave p6l this easily, forget it.
I've seen far worse flames than that.
While you were the person that Damian lost his sense of humor at, Piers
didn't identify you in this part of the summary. So I don't think Piers
was trying to ge
[Note: I originally sent this to Mr. Nobody alone, but that wasn't my
intent. I'm re-sending it here, where I wanted it to go in the first
place. -- bmb]
Mr. Nobody wrote:
trigraphs are actually better, even if you are unicode capable. ~> is
far
easier to type than ctrl-u-15F9E2A01 or whate
Buddha Buck wrote:
Maybe, maybe not On my machine right now, it is very easy for me to
type various accented letters, like a, e, etc, making words like resume
(or is that resume) nearly as fast to type as the non-accented version
resume.
Hmmm, that's not what I wrote... On my machi
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So, to bring this thread back on track *again*, I hopefully offer this
summary.
1) Damian's idea of using ~> and <~ as L2R and R2L is well-liked. Thus:
@out = grep { ... } map { ... } @in; # (1) (perl5)
becomes any of the following:
@out = gr
Brent Dax wrote:
Incorrect. The translation sequence is:
@in ~> map { ... } ~> grep { ... } ~> @out
((@in ~> map { ... }) ~> grep { ... }) ~> @out
((@in.map({ ... })).grep({ ... })) ~> @out
@out=((@in.map({ ... })).grep({ ... }))
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]({ ... }).grep({ ... })
The only differen
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2003, at 09:51 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
From: "Sean O'Rourke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
So 'if' and friends are just (native) subroutines with prototypes like:
IIRC it's not that pretty, unfortunately, if you
Smylers wrote:
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
And it provides a very visual way to define any pipe-like algorithm, in
either direction:
$in -> lex -> parse -> codify -> optimize -> $out; # L2R
$out <- optimize <- codify <- parse <- lex <- $in; # R2L
It's clear, from looking at either of
Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
The idea of discussion summaries has been well received, so I'm going to
push forward with a few. I invite everyone here to join in.
The idea is *not* that Miko writes summaries of every thread. The idea is
that the proponent of an idea, or someone very interested in an i
Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
And how do these differ in concept to the RFC process Perl 6 has already
gone through? Wouldn't it make sense, assuming that clean, final
presentations of proposed ideas or features in Perl are useful, to
re-open the RFC process?
RFC's are proposals before the comments.
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 06:16 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
>> That is, a C<$value> is an eigenstate of a C<$junction> if-and-only-if:
>>
>> $value !~~ Junction && $value ~~ $junction
>
> In general this definition makes it impossible to return a list of
Jon Lang asked me if I intended to send this message to him privately.
The answer is "No"...
-- Forwarded message ------
From: Buddha Buck
Date: Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: dimensionality in Perl 6
To: Jon Lang
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Jon L
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Jon Lang wrote:
> Buddha Buck wrote:
>> I don't think a Num is necessary, but I could see a Rat.
>
> As is, is Duration implemented by means of a Num, or a Rat? Whichever
> it is, that's the type that the difference of two Instan
98 matches
Mail list logo
