On Monday, November 25, 2002, at 04:46 PM, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 14:25, Michael Lazzaro wrote:(2) The behavior of an explicit bool type, _if_ one exists, that stores "truth", not "value". Such that C<my bool $y = (0 but true)> stores true, not 0, and does so in "the most efficient way".If you don't already know whether it exists, or how it will roughly work
(lexically), you shouldn't be discussing it on p6d. Kicked back to p6l.
<snip>
The main difference is that p6-docs is intended to move very narrowly from topic to topic, in a roughly predetermined order, focusing on each one until the more dedicated members start to bleed from the ears and/or we're convinced we have *all* the answers we need from the design team to completely describe the required Perl6 behavior. (Right now, we're discussing primitive scalar types and values.) Then we write the answers down, get it approved, and move on to the next narrowly scoped topic. The discussion is moderated, and sometimes tedious, if you're not interested in what's currently being discussed.and again... what's the scope of p6d, and how does it differ from p6l?
p6-lang is more of a free-for-all, where you can ask/propose stuff regardless of what the current topic is. The discussion is more broad, and distinctly _not_ structured.
Neither p6l nor p6d have any inherent decision making capabilities; those have been abrogated (willingly) to the design team. I certainly expect the docs contributors to propose new ideas when/where appropriate, just like p6l does. That's one of the reasons for going through things in excruciating detail, so we can find any potential gotchas or places in which broader generalization may help.
I would recommend posting to p6-documentation if you have an issue/proposal with something the documentation project is currently discussing, and p6-language if you have other random thoughts/questions that p6d haven't gotten to yet. It's pretty much the same people, after all. :-)
MikeL
