Re: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: Author: lwall Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009) New Revision: 29129 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod Log: [S04] as several folks have suggested, rename blorst to blast I'm curious about this change. I quickly figured out that blorst was derived from BLock OR STatement (quoting the previous rev: In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement (known as a Iblorst in the vernacular)). The best that I can figure for blast is BLock And STatement, which seems to me like a less-descriptive name. And blast is less likely to google up the results I need. So, what exactly _is_ the derivation of blast? =thom
Re: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
I'm curious about the change from blorst to blast. I quickly figured out that blorst was derived from BLock OR STatement (as S04 used to say: In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement (known as a Iblorst in the vernacular)). The best that I can figure for blast is BLock And STatement. But using AND seems less correct to me. Furthermore, blast is less likely to google up the results I need. So, what exactly _is_ the derivation of blast? -- Forwarded message -- From: pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl Date: Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:34 PM Subject: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec To: perl6-language@perl.org Author: lwall Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009) New Revision: 29129 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod Log: [S04] as several folks have suggested, rename blorst to blast Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-18 18:51:35 UTC (rev 29128) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-19 04:34:29 UTC (rev 29129) @@ -1226,8 +1226,8 @@ our $temphandle = START maketemp(); In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement -(known as a Iblorst in the vernacular). -This can be particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped +(known as a Iblast in the vernacular). The statement form can be +particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped declaration to the surrounding context. Hence these declare the same variables with the same scope as the preceding example, but run the statements as a whole at the indicated time:
Re: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 08:17, Thom Boyer t...@boyers.org wrote: I'm curious about the change from blorst to blast. I quickly figured out that blorst was derived from BLock OR STatement (as S04 used to say: In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement (known as a Iblorst in the vernacular)). The best that I can figure for blast is BLock And STatement. But using AND seems less correct to me. Furthermore, blast is less likely to google up the results I need. So, what exactly _is_ the derivation of blast? perhaps 'BLock or A STatement' or 'BLock, Alternatively, STatement', or you can simply think of it as misspelled but nicer on the ears than the eyes. ~jerry
Re: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
I kinda like 'blorst'. The word makes me think of a warm stew on a cold winter night. And I agree with the searchability advantage of 'blorst' as well. /bikeshed -'f
r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
Author: lwall Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009) New Revision: 29129 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod Log: [S04] as several folks have suggested, rename blorst to blast Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-18 18:51:35 UTC (rev 29128) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-19 04:34:29 UTC (rev 29129) @@ -1226,8 +1226,8 @@ our $temphandle = START maketemp(); In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement -(known as a Iblorst in the vernacular). -This can be particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped +(known as a Iblast in the vernacular). The statement form can be +particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped declaration to the surrounding context. Hence these declare the same variables with the same scope as the preceding example, but run the statements as a whole at the indicated time:
Re: r29129 - docs/Perl6/Spec
pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote: Author: lwall Date: 2009-11-19 05:34:29 +0100 (Thu, 19 Nov 2009) New Revision: 29129 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod Log: [S04] as several folks have suggested, rename blorst to blast Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-18 18:51:35 UTC (rev 29128) +++ docs/Perl6/Spec/S04-control.pod 2009-11-19 04:34:29 UTC (rev 29129) @@ -1226,8 +1226,8 @@ our $temphandle = START maketemp(); In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a statement -(known as a Iblorst in the vernacular). -This can be particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped +(known as a Iblast in the vernacular). The statement form can be +particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped declaration to the surrounding context. Hence these declare the same variables with the same scope as the preceding example, but run the statements as a whole at the indicated time: It was the best of times, it was the *blurst* of times! Stupid monkey!
