Oh, one other tweak. The RFC proposes to overload next
to mean fall through to the next case. I don't think
this is wise, since we'll often want to use loop controls
within a switch statement. Instead, I think we should
use skip to do that. (To be read as Skip to the next
statement.)
I
Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I count 86 violations of 8.3 in the tree. 8.3-friendly doesn't appear to be
a concern.
The files themselves don't have to be 8.3; however, they should be unique in
lc( substr($base,0,8) . '.' . substr($suffix,0,3) )
Under that rule, I make
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
duplicate: ./include/parrot/register.h - ./include/parrot/register_funcs.h
This should be regfuncs.h
duplicate: ./languages/miniperl/Miniperl - ./languages/miniperl/miniperlc
Urgh. mpc?
duplicate: ./t/op/pmc_perlarray.t -
I'm going to just say this, and I ask that everyone who reads it take a
deep breath, count to 10 and then respond if you wish.
I was reading Apoc 4 and while marveling at the elegence of what Larry's
doing to the language, I had an epiphany. Perl6 is simply not Perl. It's
about as much Perl as
so please note that destruction is not collection and they are and can
be separately controlled. you have to stop thinking c++ (which will
probably NOT be directly supported by parrot) and think perlish (or
as other dynamic langs) more. perl doesn't have a delete thing and
doesn't need one.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:03:53AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I'm not really interested in Perl at all. If all Parrot can do is
allow me to write a languge that is basically Perl, then I'm not interested
in Parrot either.
To be fair, Uri did say and other dynamic languages. And I
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision history?
Don't be the slave of your tools ;-)
--
Rafael Garcia-Suarez
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:44:19AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
I'm going to just say this, and I ask that everyone who reads it take a
deep breath, count to 10 and then respond if you wish.
I was reading Apoc 4 and while marveling at the elegence of what Larry's
doing to the language, I had
At 4:12 PM + 1/28/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:44:19AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
I'm going to just say this, and I ask that everyone who reads it take a
deep breath, count to 10 and then respond if you wish.
I was reading Apoc 4 and while marveling at the
What I don't want to start (and I may have done so anyway) is a simple
name war. If you feel emotionally attached to Perl, then fine, so am
I. But if you feel that there is some compelling logic here that will
affect the community, I would be very interested.
The reason why it's still Perl
On Sat, 2002-01-26 at 12:01, Simon Cozens wrote:
A4 said that there were no barewords in Perl 6. Does this mean that
$foo{bar}
actually should be written
%foo{bar}
Hmm... I'm curious, has anyone yet tackled printf(%d{x},%d{x})? Is
that a bug or does it produce n{x} where n is the
Aaron Sherman:
# On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 11:17, Brent Dax wrote:
#
# I'd like you to perform an exercise for me if you have a Camel III.
#
# I have a Camel 1 (pink) and 2, but not 3. However, I follow
# you. You are
# (as everyone else has fallen into the trap of) thinking of only what
# hurdles a
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision history?
Don't be the slave of your tools ;-)
I'm
Okay, here's the scoop.
When an interpreter starts, P0 will have either NULL or a PerlArray
with the arguments in it. P1 will be either NULL or have a PerlHash
with the environment in it. If either should actually Do Magic on
alteration, then the appropriate Magic PMC will be in there
On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 10:43:08PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Melvin Smith wrote in perl6-language:
Besides no one has commented on Steve Fink's (I think it was him) idea
to store the result of the most recently executed conditional in $?. I
kinda like that idea myself. It makes
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:56:03AM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
Allowing $? would eliminate having any different behavior from boolean
vs scalar context, and that seems like a potentially bad idea. (And I
really don't like the idea of behavior changing based on the addition
of a $? way down
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:31:13PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 11:40 AM 1/25/2002 -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:43:07 -0500, Damian Conway wrote:
What we're cleaning up is the ickiness of having
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Simon wrote:
:
: Given hyperoperators, I wonder if we can actually drop map.
:
: So:
:
: @result = map { block } @data;
:
: becomes:
:
: @result = {block}^.(@data);
:
: Hmmm.
Some people might think of it more like this:
@result = @data
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 11:30:41AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
@result = @data ^ $subref;
That's gettin' kinda scary.
Hence the original question. :)
--
Sendmail may be safely run set-user-id to root.
-- Eric Allman, Sendmail Installation Guide
From: Brent Dax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Aaron Sherman:
#
# I think the first guy that gets hired to maintain Perl6 code,
# and think hey, I know Perl, no sweat will disagree with
# you.
I disagree. He'll see stuff he doesn't understand and try to
consult perldoc on it, at which point
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 01:52:13PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
:
:From: Brent Dax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
: Aaron Sherman:
: #
: # I think the first guy that gets hired to maintain Perl6 code,
: # and think hey, I know Perl, no sweat will disagree with
: # you.
:
: I disagree. He'll see
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Garrett Goebel wrote:
From: Brent Dax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Aaron Sherman:
#
# I think the first guy that gets hired to maintain Perl6 code,
# and think hey, I know Perl, no sweat will disagree with
# you.
I disagree. He'll see stuff he doesn't
Well, I'm not really interested in Perl at all. If all Parrot can do is
allow me to write a languge that is basically Perl, then I'm not
interested
in Parrot either.
I think it may be a good idea to wait until the Parrot folks have their
product and web site a little better documented and
There is no opcodes.pod; I'm assuming the pointer should actually be to
parrot_assembly.pod, as the canonical documentation.
Simon
--- overview.pod.oldMon Jan 28 19:42:55 2002
+++ overview.podMon Jan 28 19:43:06 2002
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
These areas will roughly map to compilation
Is a MANIFEST.SKIP a good idea, even if Configure.pl doesn't check it by
default?
Nicholas Clark
- Forwarded message from Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
List-Post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze. It
updates Parrot's version of Test::More to 0.41 and makes Parrot::Test
use Test::Builder instead of doing Evil things to Test::More.
Where's Test/Builder.pm, though?
--
At 7:46 PM + 1/28/02, Simon Glover wrote:
There is no opcodes.pod; I'm assuming the pointer should actually be to
parrot_assembly.pod, as the canonical documentation.
Applied, thanks.
--
Dan
--it's like
Larry Wall:
# Some people might think of it more like this:
#
# @result = @data ^. {block};
#
# except that {block} would be parsed as a subscript, and you want
# argument binding, so it starts looking more like:
#
# @result = @data ^- $a {block};
#
# But - really is a term-forcer, so
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:25 PM + 1/28/02, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Simon Cozens wrote in perl.perl6.internals:
Similarly, I'd like Parrot/ to move to lib/
And Test/, while you're at it.
But doesn't this require much CVS hackery to keep the revision
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Simon Cozens) wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 04:52:53PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
Perhaps we shouldn't be using ; for this.
Given hyperoperators, I wonder if we can actually drop map.
Something like
@res = ^{ DoSomething($a) }, @source -
On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 12:37:24PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think we're going to switch over to some sort of key creation op, but I'm
not sure at the moment. Constant keys are easy, of course--they can be
thrown up into the constants section, built at compile-time.
Do constants with
At 11:11 PM + 1/28/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 12:37:24PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think we're going to switch over to some sort of key creation op, but I'm
not sure at the moment. Constant keys are easy, of course--they can be
thrown up into the constants
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze. It
updates Parrot's version of Test::More to 0.41 and makes Parrot::Test
use Test::Builder instead of doing Evil
Simon Cozens writes:
: Given hyperoperators, I wonder if we can actually drop map.
Before someone panics completely, I suppose I should point out that I'm
not terribly interested in dropping the current Cmap syntax. It's
essentially a method on a closure in its current form, which doesn't
rule
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 06:03:55PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: Do they need to? In the simple case, the hyperoperator provides list
: context to its arguments, but just calls the scalar operation repeatedly
: to fake up the list operation. Any operator
:
:
At 01:52 PM 1/28/2002 -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
From: Brent Dax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Aaron Sherman:
#
# I think the first guy that gets hired to maintain Perl6 code,
# and think hey, I know Perl, no sweat will disagree with
# you.
I disagree. He'll see stuff he doesn't
Buddha Buck writes:
: We have
: while (foo()) - $a {...}
: doing the right thing.
Well, Cfor does that currently, not Cwhile, but...
: Why can't
:
: if foo() - $a { ... }
:
: take the place of the perl5
:
: if (my $a = foo()) {...}
I'd do something explicit like -$a before I'd do some
Melvin Smith writes:
: Maybe they just have a huge unwieldy Perl4 app they don't wish to port.
The perl5-to-perl6 translator should handle Perl 4 as well. It might
even handle Perls 3, 2, and 1. :-)
Larry
Perl6 isn't going to make everyone happy.
That's right, it isn't. Nor should it strive to.
First off, there are the folks who've no clue what Perl even is. Perl 6
won't make them happy. On the other hand, they won't really be disappointed
with it, either. But that's a rather silly
Readded the pio_(stdin|stdout|stderr) to make builds work again.
I moved stdin/stdout/stderr to be interp local so you can
use: interpreter-piodata-table[PIO_STDIN_FILENO], etc. now.
Those global pointers should go away because they are null
now anyway.
-Melvin
Revision Changes
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze. It
updates Parrot's version of Test::More to 0.41 and makes
On Monday 28 January 2002 21:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The third group that won't be happy with Perl 6 are those who program
in a limited subset of Perl - so limited, in fact, that they will
most likely be bitten by minor changes in the language, without the
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems to have slipped by in the post New Year's haze.
At 9:33 PM -0800 1/28/02, Steve Fink wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 09:36:19PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:47 PM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:07:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 1:55 AM -0500 1/28/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
This patch seems
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:39:36AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Dammit, I had that working before I committed things. I'll fix.
Looks like things drifted a bit since I wrote the patch. Want me to
do it over?
--
Michael G. Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl
At 12:49 AM -0500 1/29/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 12:39:36AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
Dammit, I had that working before I committed things. I'll fix.
Looks like things drifted a bit since I wrote the patch. Want me to
do it over?
If you can find where I messed up,
47 matches
Mail list logo
