Re: BEGIN {} question
ToddAndMargo via perl6-users @ 2022-09-01 10:30 -07: > On 9/1/22 00:45, Richard Hainsworth wrote: >> Treat the regexes as data for a program. Compile the program once. >> Run the regexes as often as you need. > > Please elucidate. That could save me boat loads > of time. You could take the regex string from an environment variable or read from a file. The program is compiled only once and you can test regexes without re-compilation. Thanks Richard, this is going to save me a lot of time. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: sprintf and print question
Hi Todd,
~$ raku -e '(sprintf "%.4s", "andefghi" ).put;'
ande
~$ raku -e 'put (sprintf "%.4s", "andefghi" );'
ande
If sprintf isn't a requirement, then:
~$ raku -e 'put substr("andefghi", 0..3);'
ande
HTH, Bill.
On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 7:37 PM ToddAndMargo via perl6-users <
perl6-users@perl.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Is there a cleaner way to do this?
>
> $ raku -e 'print( (sprintf "%.4s", "andefghi" ) ~ "\n";)'
> ande
>
> I want to print the first four letter s to STDOUT.
>
> -T
>
Re: sprintf and print question
ToddAndMargo via perl6-users @ 2022-09-01 19:37 -07: > Is there a cleaner way to do this? > > $ raku -e 'print( (sprintf "%.4s", "andefghi" ) ~ "\n";)' > ande > > I want to print the first four letter s to STDOUT. You can use substr, | put "andefghi".substr(0, 4) ande signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: sprintf and print question
On Fri, 2 Sept 2022 at 12:37, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users < perl6-users@perl.org> wrote: > Is there a cleaner way to do this? > > $ raku -e 'print( (sprintf "%.4s", "andefghi" ) ~ "\n";)' > ande > > I want to print the first four letter s to STDOUT. > $ raku -e 'printf "%.4s\n","andefghi"' ande -- Norman Gaywood, Computer Systems Officer School of Science and Technology University of New England Armidale NSW 2351, Australia ngayw...@une.edu.au http://turing.une.edu.au/~ngaywood Phone: +61 (0)2 6773 2412 Mobile: +61 (0)4 7862 0062 Please avoid sending me Word or Power Point attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
sprintf and print question
Hi All, Is there a cleaner way to do this? $ raku -e 'print( (sprintf "%.4s", "andefghi" ) ~ "\n";)' ande I want to print the first four letter s to STDOUT. -T
Re: BEGIN {} question
On 9/1/22 00:45, Richard Hainsworth wrote: Raku and Perl are two different languages in the same family. They evolved with different targets, perl to react quickly to internet requests, Raku to be a better programming language. This may not be the take the actual developers have, but it's what I think happened. So the thing you designed for Perl will be faster because it fits the pattern. But it's not the best way for Raku. Even though stage parse will get significantly faster over time because Raku was designed to be optimisable, I think Perl will always be faster. Hi Richard, I do not think I have been clean enough in my intentions. I have two goals: long and short term. My short term goal, which I have expounded on at length, is to assist me with a program for my business where I have to constantly keep up with it and have to do a lot recompiling. .precomp is not helpful in that instance. My long term goal is future programs (as I get better at this stuff and if I EVER have a chance to learn GLADE). What I am after is NOT a race between Perl 5 and Perl 6 (Raku) or any other programming language. I really do not care if Perl 5 compiles 300 times faster. I care what the customer's "perception" of what the start time is. Ten microseconds or two seconds, the users can't tell them apart. Ten or twenty seconds and users think something is wrong and start several more instances of the program. This is the "professionally embarrassing" part I have written about. I constantly have to tell users (of non Perl 6) programs to just wait or you will continue to crash things. A widows work around is to have them start slow to start programs by right clicking on the icon and left clicking on "Open". That way they know they did not flub the double click. Think of it this way. An NVMe drive is about eight times faster that a mechanical drive. Do the user's programs run any faster once loaded from either drive? Unless they are doing substantial (YUGE) continuing writes and reads from their drive, no they do not run any faster. But! They load substantially faster, giving the user the impression of a fast, snappy program. This colors the rest of the user's experience. And they don't start five instances of the program thinking they flubbed the double click. So I DO NOT CARE if Perl 6 is slower to compiler AS LONG as the user/customer does not think something is wrong. One or two seconds is just fine with me. I am not after microseconds. -T
Re: BEGIN {} question
On 9/1/22 00:45, Richard Hainsworth wrote: Work with Raku rather than expect it to be the same as Perl. Oh I intent too! I program in Top Down. Perl 5's subroutines are a nightmare. I ADORE Perl 6's subroutines. By saying above / below, this indicates a linear view of code at the same time. Please elucidate! Can you show me an example of FIRST and LAST There are some in the documentation https://docs.raku.org/syntax/FIRST syntax FIRST Documentation for syntax FIRST assembled from the following types: language documentation Phasers From Phasers (Phasers) Phasers FIRST FIRST Runs at loop initialization, before c. Which brings me back to my on going criticism of the documentation. It is a "refresher" for those that already know what they are doing and do not need it. Can you point me to a good beginner's reference? Treat the regexes as data for a program. Compile the program once. Run the regexes as often as you need. Please elucidate. That could save me boat loads of time.
Re: BEGIN {} question
On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, 00:59 ToddAndMargo via perl6-users, < perl6-users@perl.org> wrote: > On 8/30/22 13:34, Richard Hainsworth wrote: > > Hi Todd, > > > > > Since you continue for ever to complain about 'compile' time issues, > > "Stage parce" is specifically what I am whining about > > > rather than startup times, I wonder whether the programs you write are > > massive monolithic lines of code with thousands of lines, much like most > > standard software when FORTRAN or COBOL were the high level languages, > > or whether you design things to make each section more manageable. > > > $ raku -c --stagestats GetUpdates.pl6 > Stage start : 0.000 > Stage parse : 17.851 > Stage syntaxcheck: Syntax OK > > Perl 5 does it over 300 times faster on the code I ported > Raku and Perl are two different languages in the same family. They evolved with different targets, perl to react quickly to internet requests, Raku to be a better programming language. This may not be the take the actual developers have, but it's what I think happened. So the thing you designed for Perl will be faster because it fits the pattern. But it's not the best way for Raku. Even though stage parse will get significantly faster over time because Raku was designed to be optimisable, I think Perl will always be faster. Having said that Raku is still better because it separates out things that should be separate. So you may need to change the way you handle your task. Work with Raku rather than expect it to be the same as Perl. > > > > > If the programs you write to be run from the command line are thousands > > of lines long, then yes!! you will suffer!!! from long startup times Think about the difference between start up and parsing. Move as much stuff away from parsing as possible. > > because the program is re-compiled EVERY time. However, if you redesign > > > Hi Richard, > > Long time no talk to you either. Don't be a stranger. > (If you like, I can always "whine" about compile times > to get your attention, if you like. Chuckle.) > > Thank you. That letter took a lot of work! > > How does this sound? > No. I think you are missing the explicit difference being made in Raku, which differs from all other languages I know (explicit since one could argue C preprocessing does the Sam) between compile time and run time. Raku explicitly allows you to specify compile time actions in the program itself. By saying above / below, this indicates a linear view of code at the same time. This distinction will become even greater when the new Macros are incorporated. That's the next version of Raku. > > BEGIN is a special block of code called a "phaser" > that runs at compile time. It will see any code > above it, such as variables and imported modules, > but not below it. > > Snip > > Can you show me an example of FIRST and LAST > > There are some in the documentation > > > Where .precomp does not work for me is my software > updates program. This is a behemoth program (imports > six of my custom modules too) that goes out and checks > for software updates that I support at my customer > sites. it is about 70 programs. > Change the way you do this to be more compliant with the realities of Raku. You may find in the refactoring process that your old way is probably subject to bit rot. > > To do this open the web site with firefox. Then I > use their developer's tools to examine the page's > source code. I find the fragment I am looking > for and regex them to extract them. > > In the process, I goof the regex/s "A LOT". Not > to mention having to chase down hidden character > that do not appear in Firefox's page source. > And download that are different on a web browser > than with curl. > > I do have a function that allows me to only run that > one web site's extraction, so I do not have to go > through all 70 of them. > > So, I have to recompile the code maybe up to 20 times > depending on the difficulty of the web site. The > L-O-N-G delays drives me nuts. > Treat the regexes as data for a program. Compile the program once. Run the regexes as often as you need. > > Snip. > > Speaking of BEGIN, is this Raku's "parallel > processing" method? Does Raku have a way to > spawn parallel processes and have them talk to > each other? > > -T > > Concurrency is a major change that Raku does differently. But it bursts my > head. Because concurrency is hard! > > > > > > > >
