Re: Manuthreading

[TSa]

HaloO,

Damian Conway wrote:
I think that's an appalling idea. <<>> is *vastly* more valuable as 
interpolated word list.


I agree.

If you *have* to propose manuthreading, go with the previous proposal 
and use >><< instead. The argument that the angles should point to the 
operator is spurious. People will associate inward facing  >><< with 
hyperization, regardless of what's being hyperized.


Actually I think it is the argument that is hyperized, or not?
I mean foo(>>1,2,3<<) should expand to (foo(1),foo(2),foo(3))
that is a list of three return values. Or not?
--
$TSa.greeting := "HaloO"; # mind the echo!

Re: Manuthreading

[Damian Conway]

Yuval Kogman wrote:


Luke said he was going to sleep, so I'll point you to some chat logs
instead of letting you wait for his reply:


http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/perl6?date=2005-08-28,Sun&sel=281#l460


Thanks for that.



Bottom line: the aim is to change the meaning.


I think that's an appalling idea. <<>> is *vastly* more valuable as 
interpolated word list.


If you *have* to propose manuthreading, go with the previous proposal and use 
>><< instead. The argument that the angles should point to the operator is 
spurious. People will associate inward facing  >><< with hyperization, 
regardless of what's being hyperized.


Damian

Re: Manuthreading

[Yuval Kogman]

On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 22:22:07 +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
> You're going to need to find another syntax. That one already means something 
> else (namely, shell-like interpolating word list).

Luke said he was going to sleep, so I'll point you to some chat logs
instead of letting you wait for his reply:


http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/perl6?date=2005-08-28,Sun&sel=281#l460

Bottom line: the aim is to change the meaning.

-- 
 ()  Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418  perl hacker &
 /\  kung foo master: /me climbs a brick wall with his fingers: neeyah!



pgpi0PoKjISUx.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Manuthreading

[Damian Conway]

Luke wrote:


Now I'm going to propose a variant for circumfix:

foo(1, <<@a>>, 2);

Where the meta operator is pointing to the parentheses around the
call.  Then it is easy to do my map above:

my ($val1, $val2, $val3) = foo("bar", <<1,2,3>>, "baz")


You're going to need to find another syntax. That one already means something 
else (namely, shell-like interpolating word list).


Damian

Re: Manuthreading

[Yuval Kogman]

On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 09:45:02 +, Luke Palmer wrote:

> Where the meta operator is pointing to the parentheses around the
> call.  Then it is easy to do my map above:
> 
> my ($val1, $val2, $val3) = foo("bar", <<1,2,3>>, "baz")

I think a some << and >> of the same "shape" thrown into to the
parameters is in order.

Either of these works for me, one reminds me of "explode this, then
take the data and funnel it into these", and the other looks more
like symmetrical shapes to me:

my (>>$val1, $val2, $val3<<) = foo("bar", <<1, 2, 3>>, "baz");

my (<<$val1, $val2, $val3>>) = foo("bar", <<1, 2, 3>>, "baz");

but this doesn't really scale:

my (<< << $val1, $val2>>, <<$val3, $val4>> >>) =
foo("bar" << <<1, 2>>, <<3, 4>> >>, "baz")

we have soome variants:

1, 3
1, 4
2, 3
2, 4

but the return of which pair goes into which value?

-- 
 ()  Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 0xEBD27418  perl hacker &
 /\  kung foo master: /me supports the ASCII Ribbon Campaign: neeyah!!!



pgp4dwboVHDL5.pgp
Description: PGP signature