Nathan Torkington writes:
: Damian Conway writes:
: My (limited) understanding of the aims of Perl 6 were to start again with a
: clean slate and fix the things that are broken, or that could be designed
: better with hindsight. Backwards compatibily was to be fed to the lions.
:
: Larry's
Nathan Wiger writes:
: Is there any interest to do this in the community with tainting? Adding
: a 'use tainting' to Perl 6 (or 5.7, for that matter)?
Unfortunately, tainting is a data-flow/data-typing concept, and when
you try to implement data-flow/data-typing concepts with lexical
scopes, you
Peter Scott writes:
: If the prefix-less form of filehandles was absent from Perl 6, I would be
: far less enthusiastic about my RFC. I agree; they're a kind of scalar.
In fact, they're a kind of object.
: (Just occurred to me that one could view the % prefix of hashes as denoting
: a
Peter Scott writes:
: At 06:28 PM 8/2/00 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
: ref() has always been a de facto typeof operator, no?
:
: open my $fh, " /etc/motd";
: print ref $fh
: GLOB
:
: Can we make that IO in P6...?
Maybe, but it might be some class derived from an IO object,
Graham Barr writes:
: On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 11:50:10AM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
: On 2 Aug 2000, Gisle Aas wrote:
:
: =head1 PERL5 PORTABILITY
:
: Calls to time() could be transformed to int(time()) when converting
: perl5 programs to perl6.
:
: Unless there's a:
:
: use
Tom Christiansen writes:
: Not sure I agree with that. I think one point of confusion / perceived
: difference between filehandles, open(), and basically every other
: builtin is that all the others *return* what you want.
:
: Think of all the {file,dir}handle syscalls. They don't do that.
:
Steve Simmons writes:
: On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 04:47:47PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
:
: Put together an RFC for it. (Soon!) This is a language topic, but it will
: impact internals a touch, and I'd like to get as many of the "impact
: internals" things spec'd out as soon as possible . . .
Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
: Here in my pre-caffiene morning trance it occurs to me that a few of
: the "fringe" features of perl should be removed from the langauge.
: Here's a few things that I would venture to say that none of the
: "perl5 is my first perl" people have probably ever actually
Johan Vromans writes:
: On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 09:50:11PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
: So Larry is doing most of the evaluation for us. He's the one who
: gave us the good things in the Perl language we have now. He'll be
: the one vetoing the ridiculous ideas.
:
: Larry said: "Perl5
raptor writes:
: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/linux/rt/07282000/transcript.html
That's a good summary of what we've been thinking. Here's another
article that talks about a lot of the things we *should* be thinking.
In fact, it's possible this article should be required reading for
anyone
Johan Vromans writes:
: Nick Ing-Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
:perl.exe + perl.dll or .../bin/perl + libperl.so
:
: RFC: Should the perl program be called differently (e.g., perl6) to
: allow sites to run 5 and 6 in parallel until their migration is
: completed (if ever)?
We will
Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
: On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 10:57:27AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: raptor writes:
: : http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/linux/rt/07282000/transcript.html
:
: That's a good summary of what we've been thinking. Here's another
: article that talks about a lot
Ted Ashton writes:
: Thus it was written in the epistle of Segher Boessenkool,
:
: The magic defined($_ = FILE) only happens if FILE is the only thing
: inside while().
:
: In this case, it's not (there's a chomp() inside as well), so the magic
: doesn't apply.
:
: Ok. One more time . .
Larry Wall writes:
: (Note that under Unicode, we might well have one line terminated with a
: line separator, and the next line terminated with a page separator, and
Make that paragraph separator.
Larry
Bart Lateur writes:
: On Wed, 9 Aug 2000 08:59:41 +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
:
: D'oh! ;-)
:
: Ah, yes. Chris Nandor's module D'oh couldn't possibly be called with
: this appropriate name any more.
:
: http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=modulequery=d%3A%3Aoh
:
:
: OTOH, try this:
:
:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Most of the requests for deletion seem to begin with, "This isn't
: used..."
:
: To which, "*I* use it." is a very valid argument.
:
: Agreed. The real problem with ?...? is that it complicates the hell out
: of the parser. So long as the special
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: =head1 IMPLEMENTATION
:
: This strikes me as being a fairly easy thing to do, but then again
: internals ain't my thing, baby.
The problem I see here isn't the internals--it's how do you translate
Perl 5 to Perl 6?
Larry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: p52p6 would handle it (by translating all Perl 5 Cx="y"'s to Perl 6
: C'x',"y"'s.
:
: I *must* put this in the RFC!
I think most of the RFCs could use a MIGRATION POLICY section, or
some such.
Larry
Dave Storrs writes:
: Here's my question of procedure: plenty of times on these lists,
: I see something that I think is a really good idea. I don't want to waste
: bandwidth by posting just a "me too!", but I also don't want the idea to
: die because no one weighed in in support of it.
Steve Simmons writes:
: On Sat, Aug 12, 2000 at 06:18:08AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
:
: Please, please, please, PLEASE, let us not replicate the debacle that is
: C++'s const modifier!
:
: It doesn't feel like a debacle to me, it feels like it put the control
: in the programmers hands.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Yep. Or more generally "Standardize Perl on all platforms to one
: common time epoch" and reccommend the Unix epoch since it's so
: widespread. :-)
Oh, gee, where's your sense of history? (As in creating our own. :-)
Maybe we should invent our own epoch, like the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: To put it another way, no one should ever be tempted to do this:
:
: $obj-{'attribute'}
:
: for efficiency reasons inside a tight loop or what have you. (And no,
: the solution is not to "use C when you need efficiency." I shouldn't
: need to use portable
Nathan Torkington writes:
: Steve Fink writes:
: We are NOT here to construct a radically better language. We are here to
: design the underpinnings of one.
:
: Perhaps. And by "perhaps", I mean "no".
:
: We're here to say what we'd like to see in the next version of Perl.
: These can be big
Tom Christiansen writes:
: I've very rarely found cases where ?? was useful and // didn't work, and
: never in regular code.
:
: From the Camel:
:
: The C?? operator is most useful when an ordinary pattern match
: would find the last rather than the first occurrence:
:
: open
Ariel Scolnicov writes:
: I was asked to debug a weird Perl5 problem yesterday. The code in
: question looked roughly like this (indented 4 spaces, but otherwise
: unchanged):
:
: #!perl -w
: use strict;
:
: print END;
: The next line contains a space at the end.
: END
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: : I would like to see a compiler warning for this:
: : "Spaces detected after apparent here document terminator", but
: : preferably phrased better.
: :
: : Are there any objections?
:
: I object, vaguely. I think it should just Do The
David L. Nicol writes:
: What if there were a faster way to do this, a way to Cstudy a
: group of regexes and have the computer determine which ones had
: parts in common, so that if $situation =~ m/^foo/ is true, the
: fifty rules that start ^bar don't waste any time. At all.
Perl 4 did this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: We already have plenty of statements with implied semicolons:
:
: print "foo";
: for @list {}
: print "bar";
Yes, we do, and I'm trying to figure out how to write a prototype for
one of those. :-) / 2
: I'd have expected:
:
: print (1,
John Porter writes:
: Could you make it "evaporate" and compile time, just like the (proposed) qc()?
Hard to make it evaporate at compile time and still give a warning at
run time. :-)
Larry
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) The ability to dump out a variable and all its
Tom Christiansen writes:
: 2) The ability to dump out a variable and all its attached state into
: something that can be loaded in later somewhere else.
:
: To hope to do this completely and correctly is courageous.
:
: my @funx = ();
: for my $name (qw/violet purple cream/) {
:
Randal L. Schwartz writes:
: "Joe" == Joe McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: Joe This is done by using SNOBOL's dynamic function evaluation and
: Joe conditional assignment during a pattern match. To do this kind of
: Joe thing in Perl, we'd need to be able to match a substring, and
: Joe
Suresh Kumar R writes:
: Perl should become PEARL
Er, the folks at http://www.irt.uni-hannover.de/pearl/pearl-gb.html
might have something to say about that.
Larry
Tom Christiansen writes:
: It would appear that altering /|| on LHS context would entail,
: in the list assignment scenario, calling that operand in list context
: and then deciding whether it were true or not by some "intuitive"
: means (almost certainly by using whether its element count were
:
Bart Lateur writes:
: Apropos those extended mechanisms: couldn't we use the same mechanism as
: is currently in use for $!, for $@ too? I mean: $! in numerical context
: gives an error number, in string context a text string. Then
:
: die "I'm outta here: $!";
:
: should assign both the
Chaim Frenkel writes:
: LW P.S. I think we *could* let @foo and %bar return an object ref in scalar
: LW context, as long as the object returned overloads itself to behave as
: LW arrays and hashes currently do in scalar context.
:
: Isn't this an internals issue?
Not completely. The scalar
Dan Sugalski writes:
: And do we want to consider making this (and its ilk) Do The Right Thing?
:
:(@foo, @bar) = (@bar, @foo);
We certainly want to consider it, though perhaps not in -internals.
You can talk about passing @bar and @foo around as lazy lists, and
maybe even do lazy
Jarkko Hietaniemi writes:
:* XS, the system for extending Perl with C or C++, will be replaced
: with something much easier to use. This will give people very
: convenient access to existing code libraries, and write C or C++
: subroutines that can be called as Perl
David Grove writes:
: [1] Strongs is pure Koine. I'd think Larry would be more of the Ionic
: type. g
You might say I get a charge out of Homer. :-)
Actually, I've done more Attic than Ionic. And I haven't done enough
of any of them to get very far from my lexicon. But I started Greek at
Randal L. Schwartz writes:
: "Nathan" == Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:
: Nathan This is interesting, and in my gut I like it. Many people I've worked
: Nathan with end up writing:
:
: Nathan@foo[0]
:
: Nathan Which works.
:
: "Works", for some odd meaning of the word "works".
David Whipp writes:
: You may be right that there are no useful literals other than
: strings, integers, reals and lists. OTOH, if we are going to
: construct a meta-language which supports multiple syntaxes,
: then it is very likely that each application-specific language
: would have its own
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 10:16 AM 4/17/2001 +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
: On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 02:49:07PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
: People seem to think that telling Perl 5 apart from Perl 6 is trivial.
:
: My reading of Larry's comments is that it will be _made_ trivial at the
: file
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 12:17 AM 4/20/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
: Recursive parsing is not needed. We have the HERE string, which can
: include anything in with the rest of the code, by looking for the
: end-token. The perl5 Inline module works that way.
Indeed, Perl 5 works that
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Dav=ED=F0?= Helgason writes:
: I _really_ think dot-syntax would make perl prettier as well as make it
: more acceptable to the world of javacsharpbasic droids. Which is some
: kind of goal, no?
Consider it a given that we'll be using . for dereferencing. (Possibly
with - as a
Stephen P. Potter writes:
: Maybe this is a crazy (or stupid) idea, but why couldn't we use the $, @,
: and % characters?
:
: @foo = @a @+ @b; # element by element add
Because it's difficult to tell the operators from the terms visually.
Larry
Nathan Wiger writes:
: Larry Wall wrote:
:
: : I _really_ think dot-syntax would make perl prettier as well as make it
: : more acceptable to the world of javacsharpbasic droids. Which is some
: : kind of goal, no?
:
: Consider it a given that we'll be using . for dereferencing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Okay, then:
:
: @foo = @( @a + @b );# @(), $(), and %() set context.
:
: Easier to identify the operators, and little or no question about the
: context...
Well, sure, though it was already in list context from the assignment...
I do expect that @() and
Glenn Linderman writes:
: Why not
:
:@foo = @( a + b ); # element by element add of @a and @b
I expect that's be written:
@foo := @a + @b;
where the := says to treat the left side as a prototype, and a bare
array in a prototype is going to put scalar context on the right side,
and a
Graham Barr writes:
: On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 11:40:50AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: I do expect that @() and $() will be used for interpolating list and
: scalar expressions into strings, and it is probably the case the $()
: would be a synonym for scalar(). @() would then be a synonym
Bart Lateur writes:
: Or, in analogy to cmp, gt etc:
:
: $a = $b plus $c;
: or
: $a = $b cat $c;
It would probably have been Ccc if it had come to that.
Larry
John Porter writes:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: I do expect that @() and $() will be used for interpolating list and
: scalar expressions into strings, and it is probably the case the $()
: would be a synonym for scalar(). @() would then be a synonym for
: the mythical list() operator. Which
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On 4/23/01 3:25 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
: : From a trainer's point of view, having two operators which look very
: similar, : are used for the same thing in various different languages, and do
: *almost* : the same thing but not quite, is completely *asking
Branden writes:
: I'm starting to be a bit worried with what I'm reading...
:
: 1) Use $obj.method instead of $obj-method :
:
: The big question is: why fix what is not broken? Why introduce Javaisms and
: VBisms to our pretty C/C++-oid Perl? Why brake compatibility with Perl 5
: code (and
David L. Nicol writes:
: Dan Sugalski wrote:
: I'm not a parser guy by any means (unfortunately) but we have
: the distinct possibility of completely replacing all of the
: parser rules after token X appears, whatever that token might
: be. (Heck, we may have the possibility of replacing the
Bart Lateur writes:
: On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:14:50 -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
:
: Using + for concat: no!
:
: My vote is to use . and require space before and after.
: $this.$is.$ugly.$anyway ;)
:
: My vote is to ditch the concat operator altogether. Hey, we have
: interpolation!
:
:
Edward Peschko writes:
: I guess my question is what would be the syntax to access hashes? Would
:
: $hashref.{ }
:
: be that desirable? I really like -{ } in that case..
It won't be either of those. It'll simply be $hashref{ }.
Larry
Edward Peschko writes:
: Ok, so what does:
:
: my %hash = ( 1 = 3);
: my $hash = { 1 = 4};
:
: print $hash{1};
:
: print?
4. You must say %hash{1} if you want the other.
Larry
Bart Lateur writes:
: Er... hip hip hurray?!?!
:
: This is precisely the reason why I came up with the raw idea of
: highlander variables in the first place: because it's annoying not being
: able to access a hash passed to a sub through a hash reference, in the
: normal way. Not unless you do
Eric Roode writes:
: John Porter wrote:
: IIUC, this ability is precisely what Larry was saying Perl6 would have.
:
: I may have my history wrong here, but didn't Ada try that?
Not at all. The syntax of Ada was nailed down tighter that almost any
language that ever existed.
: Super-flexible,
Dan Sugalski writes:
: And on the other hand you have things like Forth where every program
: essentially defines its own variant of the language, and that works out
: reasonably well. (Granted it's more of a niche language, especially today,
: but that's probably more due to its RPN syntax)
Nathan Wiger writes:
: Now, it may be that all the We should use . people are just keeping
: quiet, or think it's obvious why this is a benefit, but I'm unconvinced.
: Again, I'm open-minded, but the only argument I've really heard is to
: make Perl more Java/Python-like. This doesn't sway me at
Dan Sugalski writes:
: It's also the one reason that I really like the idea of policy files of
: some sort, to allow sites that don't want this sort of thing to forbid it.
: I'm not talking things like perl automagically loading policy files in.
: Rather having use site_policy; set limits that
John Porter writes:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: On the other hand, people don't generally declare which dialect they're
: going to speak in before they start speaking.
:
: On the other other hand, perl already embraces the philosophy
: of pre-declaring things that change the language. That's what
Dan Sugalski writes:
: Besides, having the site administrator forbid the installation of parser
: tweaks might not be what is wanted. If we get PPython in there, a site may
: well have a Python.pm module handy, and source might start:
:
:use site_policy qw(Python);
:
: for modules that
Simon Cozens writes:
: Hey, that would make _ _ __ legal Perl code. Abigail, Abigail!
Now we just need to make ... ___ ... mean something exceptional.
: (I still prefer ~, but acknowledge that this is just bikeshed painting.)
Bikesheds need to be painted occasionally.
Larry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: use OReilly::Policy;
:
: or
:
: use Mongolian::Navy::ProcurementOffice::Policy;
:
: might be more in order.
:
: You Americans and your non-ISO penchant for putting the specific before
: the general. Surely that should be:
:
:
Dan Sugalski writes:
: I hadn't really considered having a separate module for each type of site
: policy decision.
Er, neither had I. Each site only has one policy file. I just want it
named after the actual site, not some generic name like Policy. I
think policy files are inherently
Michael G Schwern writes:
: (grep {...} @stuff)[0] will work, but its inelegant.
It's inelegant only because the slice doesn't know how to tell the
iterator it only needs one value. If it did know, you'd call it
elegant. :-)
Larry
David Grove writes:
: Larry, et. al.: Is this similarity on purpose?
Yes, but only becase .NET is a VM, not because it's from MicroSoft.
The basic goal is to have a Perl VM that can sit easily on other VMs,
whether .NET's or Java's or our own. Another example of competing
by cooperating, which
H.Merijn Brand writes:
: On Wed, 2 May 2001 08:05:29 -0700 (PDT), Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Michael G Schwern writes:
: : (grep {...} @stuff)[0] will work, but its inelegant.
:
: It's inelegant only because the slice doesn't know how to tell the
: iterator it only needs one
Bart Lateur writes:
: Because you might have a wantarray situation that expects no values?
:
: () =3D whateveryouwant();
:
: You can always expect one more than is on the LHS.
:
: How is this currently handled with split()?
It fakes up a third argument that is one more than the length
Dan Sugalski writes:
: I'd really like to get into the details of what is and isn't valid for the
: optimizer to do, though I expect it's still a little early in the
: Apocalypse season for that.
Doubtless we'll do as other compilers do, and have a little knob you
just keep turning up until
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Hopefully the something similar, I hope in Perl 6 we will able to
: bury the 0 but true workaround to the backyard on a moonless night :-)
:
: Especially since you don't need it. 0E0 and 0., to name just two,
: work just as well. ;-)
:
:
Edward Peschko writes:
: : (is a nice city in Italy with a great symbol, the tower of Pisa).
: :
: : a'P' at the beginning, which means 'Perl',
: : an 'I' which may mean 'Interpreter',
: : a'S' which may means'Six'
: : an 'A' which may means
David L. Nicol writes:
: I am going to miss doublequoting being the default quoting for
: here strings. I find that to be a very nice optimization and
: would like to know more about the reasoning behind taking it
: away. I worry that official standard p6 will be more difficult
: to use than
Richard Proctor writes:
: In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I believe this may be
: ambiguious.
:
: It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is also being
: proposed for a null token disambiguate context. As in $foo\Q[bar].
Hmm, yes, that's a problem. I'd
Larry Wall writes:
: Richard Proctor writes:
: : In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I believe this may be
: : ambiguious.
: :
: : It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is also being
: : proposed for a null token disambiguate context. As in $foo\Q[bar
Dan Sugalski writes:
: Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
: the less pleasant looking bits? $foo1 (where and are the double
: angle characters) as an alternative to $foo\Q[1] if the user's got the
: characters handy?
Actually, my first thought a year
David L. Nicol writes:
: Not a problem. \Q means quotemeta, except immediately following
: a interpolated identifier. You want to start metaquoting immediately
: after a curious interpolation? use \Q\Q.
The word except should be a red flag that you're trying to define an
exception. We're
Edward Peschko writes:
: also - why does it have to be tied to perl (in name) at all?
Er, because we're writing it?
: I like the idea
: that it would *not* be tied to perl, ie: it would be more generic if it was
: not named after it.
Well, the fact that Tcl and Tk both start with T didn't
Simon Cozens writes:
: On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
: : while ($STDIN) { ... }
: I'm wondering what this will do?
: $thingy = $STDIN;
: This seems to have two possibilities:
: 1. Make a copy of $STDIN
:
: This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean*
Dan Sugalski writes:
: That's cool. I was just thinking it might not be a bad idea for us to set=20
: some equivalencies up in advance. If not, that's fine too. (I'll just slip=
: =20
: them in while you're not looking... :)
Hmm. Harks back to the colonial era: I claim these brackets in the
Nathan Wiger writes:
: : This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning read to $_,
: : just like the current while (FOO) magic we all know and occasionally
: : love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an
: : explicit readline to a variable other than $_
:
Nathan Wiger writes:
: You know, I was just thinking about this, and I agree with Dan. Actually,
: there's some big problems in trying to get rid of and make Perl do the
: right thing in boolean context (like the while loop example). Consider:
:
:$FH = open /etc/motd;
:die No good
Dan Sugalski writes:
: We'd want an alternative opcode running loop for all this, and it could
: easily enough check times, as could special opcodes. Long-running codes
: could also check at reasonable breakpoints. (Still in trouble with C
: extensions, but that's pretty much a guarantee)
Eric Roode writes:
: And the fact is, I've always loathed qw(), despite the fact that I
: invented it myself. :-)
: -- Larry Wall in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
:
: Well, one person's ugly is another person's joy forever.
:
: Regardless of the aesthetics of q//, qq//, qw//, et al
John Porter writes:
: Pardon me if someone has already suggested this, but...
: Couldn't labels really be (aliases to) iterator objects?
: So that
: next FOO
: really *does* mean
: FOO.next
Ordinary next methods don't do a goto.
Larry
Nathan Wiger writes:
: One thing I think we should avoid is as many special cases as possible.
: This is already why people hate currently - because it does both glob()
: and readline().
:
: I would say that having history is actually a good thing. It's a
: foundation, really, since readline()
Lipscomb, Al writes:
: --_=_NextPart_001_01C0D71B.8F67C8EA
: Content-Type: text/plain;
: charset=iso-8859-1
:
:
:
: $$STDIN # Return one element regardless of context.
: @$STDIN # Return number of element wanted by context.
: *$STDIN # Return
Peter Scott writes:
: At 01:51 AM 5/6/01 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
: The debate rages on: Is Perl Bactrian or Dromedary?
:
: It's a Dromedary, it says so in the Colophon.
:
: But maybe the symbol of Perl 6 should be a Bactrian, with the extra hump
: symbolizing the increased power.
:
: You
Nathan Wiger writes:
: First off, before I forget to mention it, nice job on Apoc2 Larry! You are
: the man. I know alot of us on p6l can seem like harsh critics at times, but
: it's only because we love Perl so much. ;-)
We'll have to do something about that. :-)
: Anyways, in addition to the
: is = typing, inheritance, etc.
: has = composition, aggregation, etc.
:
: True, but those are basic OO concepts, which don't neatly apply to
: property-lists (a very old Lisp concept that Perl6 is adopting).
Well, you can think of it like that, but I'm actually trying for some
happy
Dan Sugalski writes:
: At 09:32 AM 5/8/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: Perl 6 might not put all the elements of @b on the stack as a temporary
: list. Rather, it might just put \@b marked as expandable. (It might
: also have to put some kind of copy-on-write lock on @b to keep it from
Simon Cozens writes:
: On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:32:24PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
: a syntactic loop control iterator object
:
: I surely hope you're joking.
It could certainly be argued that anything you can put a label on is an
object by some definition or other. And certainly it turns
John Porter writes:
: Peter Scott wrote:
: Even if it has a
: fixed-length prototype, is Perl smart enough to know that it can't be
: called as an object method, bypassing prototype checking?
:
: Maybe p6 won't have that loophole.
It won't, if the type of the object can be determined at
Simon Cozens writes:
: On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:47:19PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
: Not that there are any such people. Yet.
:
: Indeed. And I suspect that the first Perl 6 programmers are Perl 5
: programmers, who know damned well what next FOO means.
Well, it's certainly the case that
Simon Cozens writes:
: This also led me to think about what happens when we introduce new built-ins.
: Perl 5 has had a complete built-in freeze for a long long time now because
: you can't bring in a new built-in without risking smacking subroutines in
: old code.
Right, that's been an
Me writes:
: So bool would perhaps be a synthetic property that has opposite
: polarity
: from bit? I can see that, sort of. It's something like electrons
: being
: negative, thank you Mr. Franklin.
:
: s/bit/yes/
:
: yes?
:
: And, despite perl5's use of no as the opposite
: of use, and
Simon Cozens writes:
: On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 03:00:51PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
: Bit of a digression; but, the dynamicity of a language is in
: no way implicated by the number of methods in one build-in
: class. (Besides, this class will have at least three.)
:
: Ooh, at least three.
David L. Nicol writes:
: Larry Wall wrote:
:
: Syntactically speaking it's too ambiguous to have both a unary and a
: bracketing .
:
: Cool. Do we get a operator to use as an l-value, instead of print?
:
: $log = join localtime, 'difficult cramigudgeo';
I don't think so.
: It's
1 - 100 of 2342 matches
Mail list logo
