At 04:54 PM 6/29/2001 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 09:50:55AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Besides, there are languages that do this on a per-object basis all the
> > time anyway (aren't there? I think there are) in which case it makes sense
> > to yank it into the co
At 07:12 PM 6/29/2001 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>Please look at Class::Object before responding. URL below.
>
>
>On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 06:36:31PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > "Any sufficiently encapsulated hack is no longer a hack."
> >
> > Who said that?
On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 04:06:10PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> http://simon-cozens.org/hacks/perl6.tar.gz
More examples, strict.pm, and *finally* support for properties.
A modified version of Damian's binary tree program from the exegesis
is included.
Now you can do some *real* Perl 6 hacki
All, of course, imho:
> Were something dreadful to happen to Larry and his estate chose to
> change the licensing terms of the current *implementation*
Well they can only do that to a copy of their own, not
existing copies. While the law isn't clear on a lot of
nuances related to more complex o
Stephen Zander [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*>
*>Speaking as someone with feet firmly in both camps (I'm a Blackdown
*>member and the Debian maintainer for the jdk and some of the largest
*>perl modules in that distribution), IMNSHO the fatal assumption made
*>by millions of people is that Java is O
On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 01:49:45PM -0700, Stephen Zander wrote:
> Perl's great blessing is also it's great curse; there's a single
> implementation and that *implementation* happens to be OpenSource.
> Try writing a second Perl implementation from scratch.
Fortunately, we don't have to. :)
Perl
On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 11:57:42AM -0500, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
> If Java sucks to install on some boutique/niche platforms it
> could mean that a) noone has told them about the issues
I can't even conceive they're not accutely aware.
> b) noone in the FreeBSD/Linux world has taken it upon
Adam Turoff [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*>
*>This is the issue in a nutshell. Let's not mix business issues
*>with technical ones. Let's not mix cluster management with simple
*>end-user installation. Let's not mix businesses losing millions
*>by the microsecond with the guy who just wants his l
At 04:20 AM 6/30/01 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 01:47:39AM -0600, Dan Brian wrote:
> > > Everyone's making these assumptions, WHY WON'T ANYONE LOOK AT
> > > CLASS::OBJECT?!
> >
> > It might not work, Schwern. And even if it did, it might be really slow.
> > Somebody sh
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 05:20:40PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There's the trick, Solaris is Sun's Blessed Platform. As a
> Linux/PowerPC user, I know how Ziggy feels. I'm almost totally
> ignored by Sun and I'd imagine I'd have just as much trouble getting
> it working as he did.
This is
On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 01:47:39AM -0600, Dan Brian wrote:
> > > Having it in the core, in C[++], would be that much more efficient,
> > > and that much less of a hack. Maybe the tradeoff is that it
> > > wouldn't work. :-)
> >
> > Everyone's making these assumptions, WHY WON'T ANYONE LOOK AT
>
On Friday, June 29, 2001, at 10:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 04:22:45PM +0200, Marcel Grunauer wrote:
>> Additions and suggestion for the page are welcome, please send them to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Well, its not yet know if any of this will make it into Perl 6, bu
> > Having it in the core, in C[++], would be that much more efficient,
> > and that much less of a hack. Maybe the tradeoff is that it
> > wouldn't work. :-)
>
> Everyone's making these assumptions, WHY WON'T ANYONE LOOK AT
> CLASS::OBJECT?!
It might not work, Schwern. And even if it did, it
13 matches
Mail list logo
