On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 09:46, Matt wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:32:12 -0400, Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > 3. Labels applies to blocks, not statements
[...]
> I've missed out on some Perl6 stuff, so excuse me as this was probably
> already discussed.
>
> Does that mean this is possible?
Keep in mind that you are replying to a description of Fortress, a sort
of "next generation FORTRAN" language specification from Sun, as it
could apply to Perl 6. The example was "perlish" (but note the lack of
";"s)
So, what you're asking is "if we did this kind of thing in Perl 6, would
this then be possible?"
Just clarifying.
PS: I read over the Fortress document last night after a friend who I
introduced to LtU had looked at it, and left it on my chair (I have such
good friends). It's a great read, and I recommend it. There are many
things in there that Perl 6 could snarf, but most of the really good
bits would probably be better just implemented as a grammar module.
I like the way you can lay out a matrix, and the auto-parallelization
stuff is kind of cool. By default a generator that you loop over with
for is parallelized, so:
for x â g do
action x
end
would perform the action for all values of x in an arbitrary and
potentially simultaneous order (threading where available). You can, of
course, request that such things happen sequentially if you want.
Then you get into the multi-generator loops:
for x â g1,
y â g2,
z â g3 do
action x, y, z
end
This would execute all permutations of x, y and z in parallel (or as
close to parallel as the execution environment allowed for).
Kind of neat.
--
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith
"It's the sound of a satellite saying, 'get me down!'" -Shriekback
