Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Me wrote: > %a ^:union[op] %b > > %a :foo[op]:bar %b I think that any operators over 10 characters should be banished, and replaced with functions. ~ John Williams

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On 30/10/02 13:41 -0800, David Wheeler wrote: > On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:35 PM, Graham Barr wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > >> --- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> Do these French quotes come through? > >>> > >>> @a

Re: perl6 operator precedence table

> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:02:44 +1300 (NZDT) > From: Martin D Kealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > We don't in general have a "let" on the front of assignment statements; why > should this type of assignment be any different? (Do we want a "let" keyword? > Personally I don't think so, but what do othe

CVSMonitor Upgrade

I've upgraded the experimental perl.org cvsmonitor implementation. It's very cool. Take a peek: http://rt.perl.org/cgi-bin/cvsmonitor/cvsmonitor.pl?cmd=viewModule&module=perl_public.parrot -or- http://snipurl.com/9hn It gets updated once a day, around 3 AM Pacific time, AKA 6 AM Eastern Time

Re: Perl6 Operator List (REMAINING ISSUES)

-- On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:37:09 Michael Lazzaro wrote: >OK, by my count -- after editing to reflect Larry's notes -- only a few >issues remain before the ops list can be completed. > > > >1) Need a definitive syntax for hypers, > ^[op] and +op; >have been most seriously propose

Re: Perl6 Operator List, Damian's take

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote: : Larry wrote: : : > That's almost a reduce. Pity you have to include a variable. : > But since rvalues are illegal on the left side of an assignment, we : > *could* go as far as to say that : > : > 0 [+=] @b; # sum : > 1 [*=] @b; # product

[perl #18170] [PATCH] very complete lexical scope implementation

# New Ticket Created by Jonathan Sillito # Please include the string: [perl #18170] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=18170 > The attached patch implements a very complete set of lexical scope semantics. For th

Re: Perl6 Operator List, Damian's take

Larry wrote: That's almost a reduce. Pity you have to include a variable. But since rvalues are illegal on the left side of an assignment, we *could* go as far as to say that 0 [+=] @b; # sum 1 [*=] @b; # product '' [~=] @b; # cat dwim into reduce operators rather than bein

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

Larry wrote: The set features are a side effect of junctions, just as they're a side effect of hashes. An "any" junction might well be implemented underneath as a hash without values. Yep. Possibly we might even extend the notion of hash to any "junk". %hash = 1 | 2 | 3; So you're su

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Larry wrote: Never. Truth is relative in Perl. Having a "true" literal would imply that objects couldn't decide whether they're true or not, unless the true literal really means a superposition of all the possible true values of every type. Which is kinda hard to write, especially since a typ

Perl6 Operator List (REMAINING ISSUES)

OK, by my count -- after editing to reflect Larry's notes -- only a few issues remain before the ops list can be completed. 1) Need a definitive syntax for hypers, ^[op] and «op» have been most seriously proposed -- something that keeps a bracketed syntax, but solves ambiguity i

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

Larry elucidated: In general, for any type, how do you write [$min .. $max - $step : $step] when you don't even necessarily have subtraction defined? We don't know how to do "z" - 1 in Perl 5, for instance. Okay. I buy that. Damian

Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

> "fc" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: fc> So is it usefull to make sence out of these : fc> hash ^[op] hash fc> hash ^[op] array fc> hash ^[op] scalar fc> array ^[op] array fc> array ^[op] scalar well, you can't mung the keys to a hash, just the values. so why not just use

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Brent Dax self-deprecated: So, the love of my life is: Function call found where operator expected at - line 1, near ""dark & "handsome" That figures, actually, considering my social life... Thanks. Would the hypothetical example collector please archive the corrected version instead:

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote: : Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary. : Does it buy us enough over +1 and -1? Well, that was my first thought, but... : Proposed Now : :1..101..10 : 1..^10 1..9 : 1

RE: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Damian Conway: # Here's how to find the love of your life: # # $requirements = "tall" & "dark & "handsome" #| "old" & "rich" #| "Australian"; # # for <> -> $candidate { # my $traits = any( split //, $candidate ); # print "True love:

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Austin Hastings wrote: ?& ?| ?^ - [maybe] C-like bool operations ?&= ?|= ?^= - (result is always just 1 or 0) [?&][?|][?^] - (hyperversions) [?&]= [?|]= [?^]= [?&=] [?|=] [?^=] Two possible differences between d

Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

> hash ^[op] hash > ... > array ^[op] scalar ie, generally: term ^[op] term > what to do if @a, @b in @a ^[op] @b have different length > what to do if %a, %b in %a ^[op] %b have not the same set of keys > what to do in %a ^[op] @a > > [what to do] resolved by hash property : I'd exp

Re: perl6 operator precedence table

On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, I wrote: > > why not simply extend pattern-matching in a similar way to substr, making it > > an L-value, so that one gets > > > > $str ~ /[aeiou]+/ = "vowels($&)" > > > > or > > > > $str ~ /\d/ {hyper-symbol}= (0) x {size-of-LHS-array}; On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Larry Wall

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

Michael Lazzaro wrote: Meaning that the list: + - force to numeric context - - force to numeric context, negate +^- force to numeric context, complement ~ - force to string context ~^- force to string context, complement simply becomes: ^ - complement (type-

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Graham Barr wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:57:00PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote: > > *shrug* You may not like the aesthetics, but my point still > > stands: "is rw" is too long for something we're going to do fairly often. > > I am not so sure. If I look back through

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 03:07 PM, Damian Conway wrote: In creating my operator list I deliberated shied away from the unary and binary multimorphic forms. But I do see Graham's point and would favour retaining polymorphic unary C<^> at least. Meaning that the list: + - force

Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

So is it usefull to make sence out of these : hash ^[op] hash hash ^[op] array hash ^[op] scalar array ^[op] array array ^[op] scalar Actually , I just want to understand , why so much accent is put on vectorizing atomic operations with arrays . It seems that hashes are at least as freq

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Lazzaro) writes: > ⠉ˆ  ⠀ ¦Â â ˆ «Â Â§Â Â¿Â â ˆ†  ⠈‘  Ω ø ¶ º ⠉  Â â ‰ ¤Â â ‰ ¥Â â € ¹Â â € ºÂ â € ¡Â Ã ˜ Â Ë ‡  ¬ à ‡  Š’  ⠈ž  ¡ ⠀ ¢ How does that translate to Perl 5? -- >Almost any animal is capable learning a stimulus

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damian Conway) writes: > Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary. If you're going for user-definable operators, most of this syntax is entirely unnecessary. Take all the hairy stuff out of core and be done with it! This won't stop people arguing about it, though. :) --

RE: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

Larry Wall: # This is currently running in a window that does Latin-1 # rather than UTF-8. Do these French quotes come through? # # @a + @b No, but I'm running Outlook, so it's probably a bug on my end. :^) (It does show up in that annoying variable-width font it switches to for displaying

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

Graham Barr wrote: Now that we have gained ^ back from being a hyeroperator, could we not have ^ as a polymorphic complement operator. It can always be combined with ~ or + to force context, eg $a = ^ +$b; $a = ^ ~$b; We would then have a complement operator that I would assume objects cou

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Storrs) writes: > minimal exception to remember Another one for my irregularity check, thanks! :) -- "Though spring is here, to me it's still September, That September, in the rain" - Dinah Washington, The USENET Anthem.

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

Larry mused: On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Whipp wrote: : Larry Wall [mailto:larry@;wall.org] wrote: : > : unary (postfix) operators: : > :... - [maybe] same as ..Inf [Damian votes Yes] : > : > I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of : > endpoints by saying something l

Re: Persistance of superpositions?

Brian Ingerson wrote: Not quite. You also need to discriminate the *type* of the superposition: Oh right. I was thinking that C and friends were operations, not types. Oops. YAML type-URIs are made up of a type-family with an optional format: !domain.com/type#format and: !int is s

Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops

-- On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 07:13:40 Damian Conway wrote: >Yes. That superpositions are going to be so widely used once people >catch on, that users going to curse us every time they have to >write C at the start of every scope. So, I open my inbox and see that it has been stuffed with Perl 6

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On 30 Oct 2002 at 15:24, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote: > > If we are going to do math with ranges, we definitely need non- > > discreet ranges also. Or at least make sure it's easy enough to > > implement as a class. > > > > (1.9 .. 2.1

Re: Draft sketch of bytecode generation

On Tue, 29 Oct 2002 09:55:23 -0800, Chromatic wrote: > >I'd really like to be able to save comments from >source files as metadata. This has at least two >potential benefits. First, it >makes it much easier >to recreate the whole file from bytecode (especially >refactored bytecode). >Second, it

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:57:00PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote: > *shrug* You may not like the aesthetics, but my point still > stands: "is rw" is too long for something we're going to do fairly often. I am not so sure. If I look back through a lot of my code, there are more cases where I use

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

Dave Storrs writes: > > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Angel Faus wrote: > > > Then let's make the parens required when there is more than one > > stream. > > > > Sane people will put them there anyway, and it will force the rest of > > us to behave. > > > > It also solves the ";"-not-a-line-

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Markus Laire wrote: : And you could always have something else as a backup for those : unfortunates who can't use «+» - like ^[+] : : What are the good reasons not to use «» ? It would force everyone to get their act together with respect to Unicode. Oh, wait, that's a feat

Re: Perl6 Operator List, Damian's take

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, John Williams wrote: : They are different in the "scalar [op] list" case, as explained here: : : : ($a = 0) [+=] @b; # sum : ($a = 1) [*=] @b; # product : ($a ='') [~=] @b; # cat That's

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

On 30 Oct 2002 at 11:09, Larry Wall wrote: > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote: > :"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in > : possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite." > : -- Jane Austen? > > It is a truth universally acknowledged that a

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Angel Faus wrote: > Then let's make the parens required when there is more than one > stream. > > Sane people will put them there anyway, and it will force the rest of > us to behave. > > It also solves the ";"-not-a-line-seperator problem. > > -angel Yes! Thank y

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

Wednesday 30 October 2002 22:08, Michael Lazzaro escribió: > On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: > > for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; > > I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be > solved if the above were just written: > > for

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote: > Dave Storrs wrote: > > > Actually, yes, that would solve everything for me...and I knew > > this was valid syntax. > > So is this vertical layout, which I think will become fairly standard > amongst those who care about readability: > > for @

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: : > for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; : : I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved : if the above were just written: : : for (@a;@b) -> (

Re: Perl6 Operator List, Damian's take

On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote: > Any of you OO guys know of a case where > > $a = $a + $b; # @A [+]= @B; --> @A = @A [+] @B; > > and > > $a += $b; # @A [+=] @B; > > should be different? They are different in the "scalar [op] list" case, as explained here:

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote: > > --- Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > for @a -> $x<; @b -> $y { $x = $y[5] }; > > Yes!!! > > (Except for the '<'. That's feigen-ugly. *shrug* You may not like the aesthetics, but my point still stands: "is rw" is too long for

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:46 PM, David Wheeler wrote: But let me ask you -- how did you input those characters? Applications/Utilities/"Key Caps" (Again, OSX) which shows you where they all are. The «» quotes, for example, are option-\ and shift-option-\ :-) MikeL

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Larry Wall wrote: : if we did go back to using ^ for hyper I have no clue what to do about : xor. I'd suggest % but I use the modulus too much. Gee, % looks kinda like an X. Just put that alpha down and back away quietly, mister. There's no need for anyone to get hurt here. ;-) Damian

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:43 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote: Oh, don't say that! I already know what all of these should mean! :-) ≈ … ∫ § ¿ ∆ ∑ Ω ø ¶ º ≠ ≤ ≥ ‹ › ‡ Ø ˇ ¬ Ç Œ ∞ ¡ • Nice, I can see all of those. Your mailer is the same as mine, Apple Mail, and the headers are: Conte

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

Dave Storrs wrote: for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved if the above were just written: for (@a;@b) -> ($x is rw; $y) { $x = $y[5] }; Would that suffice to make it clearer? Actually, yes, that would solve everyt

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: > > for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; > > I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved > if the above were just written: > > for (@a;@b) -> (

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:35 PM, Graham Barr wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: --- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Do these French quotes come through? @a «+» @b Odd, I see them in this message. But In the message from Larry I see

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 01:28 PM, David Wheeler wrote: But given that I don't even know where to go to type them in, and doing so will likely be a PITA...even though I *love* the idea of using these characters, might it be better to abandon them for now? Oh, don't say that! I alre

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > --- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Do these French quotes come through? > > > > @a «+» @b Odd, I see them in this message. But In the message from Larry I see ?'s Graham.

plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

Dave Storrs writes: > is a Bad Thing and is going to cause a lot of bugs. I have the following > problems with it: > > for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; > > 1) This is (AFAIK) the ONLY place in Perl where a semicolon that > is not enclosed in parens is used for anything

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:47 PM, Larry Wall wrote: This is currently running in a window that does Latin-1 rather than UTF-8. Do these French quotes come through? @a ´+ª @b Nope. But given that I don't even know where to go to type them in, and doing so will likely be a PITA

RE: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wed 30 Oct, Larry Wall wrote: > An earlier message had something like this as a hyper: > > @a = @b[.method]; > > That absolutely won't work, because [.method] is a valid subscript. > In this case it would have to be written > > @a = @b[.]method; > > But the general problem is just ab

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do these French quotes come through? > > @a «+» @b Oui, M'sieu! __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote: > If we are going to do math with ranges, we definitely need non- > discreet ranges also. Or at least make sure it's easy enough to > implement as a class. > > (1.9 .. 2.1) + (5..7) * (72.49 .. 72.51); I don't think that "non-discrete

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

Michael Lazzaro writes: > > On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: > >for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; > > I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved > if the above were just written: > > for (@a;@b) -> ($x is rw; $

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Mark J. Reed wrote: : Larry's mail was *marked* as UTF-8, but by the time I got it it : had no French quotes in it in UTF-8, Latin-1, or any other encoding anymore. : My mailer understand UTF-8 just fine, and so does vim (which I used to : look at my spool file to check for e

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 03:33:57PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote: > On 2002-10-30 at 12:23:53, David Wheeler wrote: > > This tells me that Mail.app, for some reason, didn't know that it was > > supposed to use UTF-8 when showing Larry's mail. When I pasted his mail > > into a UTF-8 document in Emacs,

Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Nicholas Clark wrote: : On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 06:45:52PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote: : : > You are making the fundamental mistake of thinking superpositions as : > superpositions. When thinking them as another-kind-of or/and, their : > usefulness comes a lot clearer. : : >

RE: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On 29 Oct 2002 at 22:29, Larry Wall wrote: > Of course, Real Mathematicians will want [1..10) and (1..10] instead. That seems familiar, I like it ;) > There's also an issue of what (1..10) - 1 would or should mean, if > anything. Does it mean (1..9)? Does 1 + (1..10) mean (2..10)? > > And what

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved if the above were just written: for (@a;@b) -> ($x is rw; $y) { $x = $y[5] }; Would that suffice to make it cle

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 12:48:21PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote: > Current: for @a; @b -> $x is rw, $y; $z { ...stuff... }; > > The above (IIUC) means "loop over @a, pulling out two elements at a time > and aliasing them to $x (which is rw) and $y (which is r). > Simultaneously loop over @b, alia

Re: plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

--- Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > for @a -> $x<; @b -> $y { $x = $y[5] }; Yes!!! (Except for the '<'. That's feigen-ugly. I'll say "is r?" where needed, regardless of which is the default. I prefer default=ro, though, because that let's the optimizer do more by default.) I proposed

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On 30/10/02 15:33 -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote: > On 2002-10-30 at 12:23:53, David Wheeler wrote: > > This tells me that Mail.app, for some reason, didn't know that it was > > supposed to use UTF-8 when showing Larry's mail. When I pasted his mail > > into a UTF-8 document in Emacs, it looked fine.

plaintive whine about 'for' syntax

In a different thread, Buddha Buck wrote the following code snippet: for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] }; And I finally had to whimper publicly about this. I've been lurking around the P6 process since the very beginning of the RFC process. I saw the new 'for' syntax come out, and

Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

!! Sorry, in previos post I had a mistake Proposal : Vector operations for Hashes ( this is just a joke %a ^{+} %b ) the direct generalization would be as follows : @a ^[op] @b for @a ; @b -> $x ; $y { $x op $y } %a ^[op] %b # f

Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 06:45:52PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote: > You are making the fundamental mistake of thinking superpositions as > superpositions. When thinking them as another-kind-of or/and, their > usefulness comes a lot clearer. > perl5: if $x > 0 && $x < 20 && $y > 0 && $y < 20 && $z >

Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : # find common keys : @k = keys hash{ map { { _=>1 } } *( %a.keys , %b.keys ) }; It seems a bit odd to privilege the intersection over the union. Larry

Re: Vectorizing operators for Hashes

Proposal : Vector operations for Hashes %a ^{+} %b the direct generalization would be as follows : @a ^[op] @b for @a ; @b -> $x ; $y { $x op $y } %a op %b # find common keys @k = keys hash{ map { { _=>1 } } *( %a.keys , %b.keys ) }; #return has

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On 2002-10-30 at 12:23:53, David Wheeler wrote: > This tells me that Mail.app, for some reason, didn't know that it was > supposed to use UTF-8 when showing Larry's mail. When I pasted his mail > into a UTF-8 document in Emacs, it looked fine. > > Given that it's probably UTF-8 that Perl 6 sourc

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:17 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote: I can't see that right (MacOSX Jaguar) in the email; to me it looks like a forwardtick and an, um, underlined 'a' -- but in spite of that, I'm game. It's just so pretty (when it works!) On my Mac, it's spelled «op» -- can ot

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

> So despite the beauty of > > @a [+] @b > > I think it cannot survive in its current form. It overloads square > brackets too heavily. What about using colon thus: @a [:+] @b or other character after the opening bracket, so long as that character is not valid as the initial character

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 11:58 AM, Larry Wall wrote: I'd even be willing to give up ´foo bar bazª meaning qw(foo bar baz) for this. I can't see that right (MacOSX Jaguar) in the email; to me it looks like a forwardtick and an, um, underlined 'a' -- but in spite of that, I'm game.

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote: > : > No, no. I'm talking about the unary . prefix > : > > : > method blah { > : > .foo() > : > [.]foo() # What does this mean? > : > } > : > : Vector of invocations of the foo meth

Re: Iterators [was: worth adding collections to the core language?]

> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm > Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 18:59:15 + > X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/ > > Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > In

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote: : > No, no. I'm talking about the unary . prefix : > : > method blah { : >.foo() : >[.]foo() # What does this mean? : > } : : Vector of invocations of the foo methods of the current topic. Except that the topic is b

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

--- Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:13:02AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > > --- Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Maybe we've gone over this before but, if so, I don't remember > ... > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0

[perl #18166] [PATCH] routines to block and unblock DOD and GC

# New Ticket Created by Jonathan Sillito # Please include the string: [perl #18166] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=18166 > pdd09 mentions routines for blocking and unblocking both GC and DOD, however I can n

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Larry Wall writes: > @a ^[+] @b I like this one in preference to plain ^+, but (unless I'm missing something) it still leaves the question of what to do with xor. > @a '[+] @b Doesn't this reinvent the $Package'symbol problem? > The * has obvious mnemonic value of the splat sort, but al

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Larry Wall writes: > > Well, "v" for vector makes a little more sense, maybe. Could be lots of things: > > @a *[+] @b > @a .[+] @b > @a =[+] @b > @a ![+] @b > @a ^[+] @b > @a _[+] @b > @a :[+] @b > @a '[+] @b > @a v[+] @b > > There's a problem w

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote: :"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in : possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite." : -- Jane Austen? It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in possession of a rich syntax must be in need

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Jonathan Scott Duff writes: > @a `+ @b Ick. In my experience, many people actually don't get the backtick character at all. They can't find it on the keyboard, and they don't really see what's so different about it from apostrophe. Indeed, many typefaces (including common print-media face

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Personally, I'd love to see something like the whole Smalltalk > Collection hierarchy available complete with Bags, Sets, > Dictionaries, OrderedCollections and the whole deal. I note, for > instance that Christian Lemburg has implemented Set::Object, and

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In the "Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops" thread > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote: > >> But given a decent Collection hierarchy: >> >> my $seen = Set.new($start,$finish); >> >> for <> -> $next { >> print $next unless $nex

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : My own backup proposals would be: : : h<+> : h[+] : : or similar, e.g. give the brackets a prefix to differentiate them : firmly as 'hyper'. Personally, I still don't mind that extra char, : because it makes it extra-super-obvious; as we've

Re: Nondeterministic algorithms, flexops, and stuff

Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 04:03:55PM +, Piers Cawley wrote: >> Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Hey, that's neat. Although it looks like it returns the $src when there >> > isn't a path. You probably want it to return undef or

RE: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : Larry Wall writes: : > : > So despite the beauty of : > : > @a [+] @b : > : > I think it cannot survive in its current form. It overloads square : > brackets too heavily. : > : > Larry : > : : so may be @a <+> @b : : @a < => > @b

Re: worth adding collections to the core language?

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Dave Storrs wrote: : In the "Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops" thread : : On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote: : : > But given a decent Collection hierarchy: : > : > my $seen = Set.new($start,$finish); : > : > for <> -> $next { : > print $next unle

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: : @a x+ @b : @a `+ @b : @a ^+ @b# I like this one best ;-) : : if we did go back to using ^ for hyper I have no clue what to do about : xor. I'd suggest % but I use the modulus too much. Gee, % looks kinda like an X. Larr

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote: : >[op] - as prefix to any unary/binary operator, "vectorizes" the : > operator : : What, if any, guarantees are there about the order of evaluation for : vectorized operations? : : If I say : : @b = @a[.meth]; : : and .meth has a side-effect, w

worth adding collections to the core language?

In the "Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops" thread On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote: > But given a decent Collection hierarchy: > > my $seen = Set.new($start,$finish); > > for <> -> $next { > print $next unless $next =~ $seen; > $seen.insert($next); > }

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:25:21AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote: > But the general problem is just about enough to kill the whole [] > idea for hyper. Need. More. Punctuation. :-) > So despite the beauty of > > @a [+] @b > > I think it cannot survive in its current form. It overloads squar

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

[.]foo() # What does this mean? One could argue that several ways, depending on what's in the current topic. It's the exact same thing as the binary form of dot, but with the left side being implied, as 'the current topic': topic is a scalar: hyperdot does nothing (scalar hyperop sca

RE: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

Larry Wall writes: > > So despite the beauty of > > @a [+] @b > > I think it cannot survive in its current form. It overloads square > brackets too heavily. > > Larry > so may be @a <+> @b @a < => > @b @a < , > @b @a < .= > replace ( // -> { "bar" } ) but @c = @a < <=>

Re: [RFC] Perl6 HyperOperator List

On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 09:25 AM, Larry Wall wrote: So despite the beauty of @a [+] @b I think it cannot survive in its current form. It overloads square My own backup proposals would be: h<+> h[+] or similar, e.g. give the brackets a prefix to differentiate them fir

Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:13:02AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > --- Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maybe we've gone over this before but, if so, I don't remember ... > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:16:48PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > > > hyperoperators: > > > > > >

Re: Nondeterministic algorithms, flexops, and stuff

Way outside the stuff I "get", Larry mentioned something about a "transactional model" for flexen. I keep wanting that to play somewhere in there, but I can't get my brain around how it should work. Essentially, I keep degenerating into Prolog. Since I *REALLY* don't wish to change all my perl scr

RE: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5

When I'm trying to figure out what the "default" hypering semantics for an operator would be, I use this: ***BEGIN CODE*** { use strict; use warnings; sub _is_arrayref { ref $_[0] && ref $_[0] eq 'ARRAY' } sub hyper(&\@\@) { my($code, $a, $b)=@_; my @results; if

  1   2   >