Re: What is the origin of the nickname, Texas quotes?
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 11:25:14PM +, Andy Armstrong wrote: On 7 Dec 2007, at 23:19, Chas. Owens wrote: That is my take on it: Everything is bigger in Texas, even French Quotes. You know, from a complete outsider's perspective, I really prefer the Paris, Texas explanation :) Everything is bigger in Texas *except* Paris. Larry
Re: What is the origin of the nickname, Texas quotes?
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 12:12:36PM -0700, Thom Boyer wrote: Larry Wall wrote: Good guess, but no. It comes from the fact that Texas always bragged about how they were the largest state in the union, and had the biggest everything, including ten-gallon hats. That was before we added Alaska. Now if they pull that stunt we offer to carve Alaska up into 4 states, in which case Texas would be the 5th largest. But Texans still like to think big, and we love 'em all to pieces for it. Especially Patrick these days... :) Larry So, it's because this is so much bigger than «this», this, or 'this'? By the way, as a native Texan, I find offensive your claim that Texas*4 Alaska. The truth is hurtful enough: Texas*2.1787 = Alaska I had to carry it out to 4 decimal places so I wouldn't have to round the last digit UP. :-) My claim is just that that's how the standard joke goes. (I suspect the 4x probably arises from casual inspection of a mercator projection, where Alaska does look four times bigger. But then, that's the fault of Texas for being closer to the equator. :) Larry
Re: What is the origin of the nickname, Texas quotes?
On Dec 7, 2007 11:50 AM, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 12:12:36PM -0700, Thom Boyer wrote: Larry Wall wrote: Good guess, but no. It comes from the fact that Texas always bragged about how they were the largest state in the union, and had the biggest everything, including ten-gallon hats. That was before we added Alaska. Now if they pull that stunt we offer to carve Alaska up into 4 states, in which case Texas would be the 5th largest. But Texans still like to think big, and we love 'em all to pieces for it. Especially Patrick these days... :) Larry So, it's because this is so much bigger than «this», this, or 'this'? By the way, as a native Texan, I find offensive your claim that Texas*4 Alaska. The truth is hurtful enough: Texas*2.1787 = Alaska I had to carry it out to 4 decimal places so I wouldn't have to round the last digit UP. :-) My claim is just that that's how the standard joke goes. (I suspect the 4x probably arises from casual inspection of a mercator projection, where Alaska does look four times bigger. But then, that's the fault of Texas for being closer to the equator. :) Larry Like a true Texan* (grin), he skewed the numbers to make Texas look bigger than it is. It is between 2.4** and 2.5*** when you include inland bodies of water, and when you include territorial waters it may well have a 4 to 1 ratio with Texas (since it is effectively a very large peninsula and Texas has a relatively small coastline). I have placed calls to both Alaska's CGIN and NOAA NOS* and they are trying to find the area of the two states' territorial waters for me**. I was not able to find a Texas resource, but so far it looks like the NOAA NOS and OCS*** are going to be the best bets anyways. * I am resident of Virgina, so I have no axe to grind; I am just looking for a definitive answer. ** random sites on the Internet *** wikipedia: 663267/261797 = 2.5335 Census and Geographic Information Network: http://almis.labor.state.ak.us/?PAGEID=67SUBID=114 * National Ocean Service: oceanservice.noaa.gov ** Yes, I am anal, insane, and on narcotics (I had my wisdom teeth extracted this morning) *** Office of Coast Survey: http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/programs/cs/welcome.html
Re: perl 6 grammar
On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 02:47:05AM +0100, Juerd Waalboer wrote: : Jonathan Lang skribis 2007-12-06 16:36 (-0800): : I know it used to be that way back near the Dawn of Time, but methods : don't automatically topicalize anymore unless you explicitly name : one of the parameters '$_': : Huh. I guess I need to review current standards for method : declaration; last I'd checked, the invocant did not need to be : explicitly named. : : It does if you want to access it by a name other than a lone sigil. Well, or by self. Larry
[svn:perl6-synopsis] r14472 - doc/trunk/design/syn
Author: larry Date: Fri Dec 7 15:26:16 2007 New Revision: 14472 Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod Log: Some clarification of break semantics requested by dataweaver++ Generalize next, last, and break to use LABEL.leave($retval) syntax. Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod == --- doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod(original) +++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.podFri Dec 7 15:26:16 2007 @@ -12,9 +12,9 @@ Maintainer: Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 19 Aug 2004 - Last Modified: 7 Aug 2007 + Last Modified: 7 Dec 2007 Number: 4 - Version: 60 + Version: 61 This document summarizes Apocalypse 4, which covers the block and statement syntax of Perl. @@ -260,6 +260,11 @@ @evens = ($_ * 2 if .odd for 0..100); Loop modifiers Cnext, Clast, and Credo also work as in Perl 5. +However, the labelled forms use method call syntax: CLABEL.next, etc. +The C.next and C.last methods take an optional argument giving +the final value of that loop iteration. So the old Cnext LINE +syntax is still allowed but is really short for Cnext LINE: using +indirect object syntax. There is no longer a Ccontinue block. Instead, use a CNEXT block within the body of the loop. See below. @@ -636,7 +641,8 @@ associated block is executed, and the innermost surrounding block that has C$_ as one of its formal parameters (either explicit or implicit) is automatically broken out of. (If that is not the -block you wish to leave, you must use the CLABEL.leave method to +block you wish to leave, you must use the CLABEL.leave method (or some +other control exception such as Creturn or Cnext) to be more specific, since the compiler may find it difficult to guess which surrounding construct was intended as the actual topicalizer.) The value of the inner block is returned as the value of the outer @@ -667,23 +673,33 @@ explicitly or implicitly), that parameter can function as the topic of any Cwhen statements within the loop. -You can explicitly break out of a Cwhen block (and its surrounding topicalizer -block) early using the Cbreak verb. More precisely, it leaves the -innermost block outside the Cwhen that uses C$_ as one of its formal -parameters, either explicitly or implicitly. - -You can explicitly break out -of a Cwhen block and go to the next statement by using Ccontinue. -(Note that, unlike C's idea of falling through, subsequent Cwhen -conditions are evaluated. To jump into the next Cwhen block you -must use a Cgoto.) +You can explicitly break out of a Cwhen block (and its surrounding +topicalizer block) early using the Cbreak verb. More precisely, +it leaves the innermost block outside the Cwhen that uses C$_ +as one of its formal parameters, either explicitly or implicitly. +It does the essentially by simply going to the end of the block and +returning normally from that block. In other words, a break (either +implicit or explicit) is assumed to indicate success, not failure. + +You can explicitly leave a Cwhen block and go to the next statement +following the Cwhen by using Ccontinue. (Note that, unlike C's +idea of falling through, subsequent Cwhen conditions are evaluated. +To jump into the next Cwhen block without testing its condition, +you must use a Cgoto.) If you have a switch that is the main block of a Cfor loop, and -you break out of the switch either implicitly or explicitly, it merely -goes to the next iteration of the loop. You must use Clast to break -out of the entire loop early. Of course, an explicit Cnext would -be clearer than a Cbreak if you really want to go to the next iteration. -Possibly we'll outlaw Cbreak in a loop topicalizer. +you break out of the switch either implicitly or explicitly (that is, +the switch succeeds), control merely goes to the end of that block, +and thence on to the next iteration of the loop. You must use Clast +(or some more violent control exception such as Creturn) to break +out of the entire loop early. Of course, an explicit Cnext might +be clearer than a Cbreak if you really want to go directly to the +next iteration. On the other hand, Cbreak can take an optional +argument giving the value for that iteration of the loop. As with +the C.leave method, there is also a C.break method to break from a +labelled block functioning as a switch: + +OUTER.break($retval) =head1 Exception handlers
