Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mr. Nobody) writes:
Unicode operators in the core are a very, very, very, very, very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very bad idea.
We've done that.
Yeah, but not with quite so many 'very's. I think you'll find that
that
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 10:50:57PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 12:05 AM + 1/16/03, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may well be
considered reasonable thing
Sounds like the good old days of
If memory serves me right, Jonathan Sillito wrote:
x = a.f # get the method, a limited form of currying
# since the first arg (a==self) is stored
x() # output: A.f()
setattr(A, f, g) # replace A's f with g
a.f()# output: g()
x() # output (still): A.f() !!!
I was playing with doxygen (www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen/index.html)
(think javadoc for C++) and thought I'd pass along some random pictures.
Doxygen unfortunately doesn't handle perl code, and even has problems
with parrot's C. (IMHO, the world needs a wrapper hack which allows
you to run all
--- Mitchell N Charity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doxygen unfortunately doesn't handle perl code, and even has problems
with parrot's C.
You might be interested in autodia, it handles perl.
http://droogs.org/autodia/
(IMHO, the world needs a wrapper hack which allows
you to run all these
--- Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[... Massive elision ...]
Right now almost all of us are in that boat. And we're talking
about
trigraph ops, like ~ and ~ and |~ and [+=] and whatever. As we
get
better, more Unicapable, whatever,
[Note: I originally sent this to Mr. Nobody alone, but that wasn't my
intent. I'm re-sending it here, where I wanted it to go in the first
place. -- bmb]
Mr. Nobody wrote:
trigraphs are actually better, even if you are unicode capable. ~ is
far
easier to type than ctrl-u-15F9E2A01 or
Buddha Buck wrote:
Maybe, maybe not On my machine right now, it is very easy for me to
type various accented letters, like a, e, etc, making words like resume
(or is that resume) nearly as fast to type as the non-accented version
resume.
Hmmm, that's not what I wrote... On my machine, I
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 04:59:43PM -0500, Buddha Buck wrote:
Buddha Buck wrote:
Maybe, maybe not On my machine right now, it is very easy for me to
type various accented letters, like a, e, etc, making words like resume
(or is that resume) nearly as fast to type as the non-accented
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 10:07:13PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
The headers I received make no mention of character set - does your mailer
mark the message in any way? If not, then STMP will assume it's good old
7 bit ASCII
Thus we are back to using uuencode :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may well
be
considered reasonable thing
Sounds like the good old days of trigraphs.
It's very much like the good old days of trigraphs. But on the
At 8:08 AM -0800 1/16/03, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may well
be
considered reasonable thing
Sounds like the good old days of trigraphs.
It's very
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And keyboards, don't forget keyboards. These pesky primitive ones we
have now would require a lot of shift-control-alt-meta-cokebottle key
sequences...
And vt100 consoles ! There are still sysadmins that struggle with a buggy
perl script, having
On 2003-01-16 at 11:41:56, Dan Sugalski wrote:
And keyboards, don't forget keyboards. These pesky primitive ones we
have now would require a lot of shift-control-alt-meta-cokebottle key
sequences...
Unicode may have thousands of characters, but how many of them do you
think you'll use often
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may well
be
considered reasonable thing
Sounds like the good old days of trigraphs.
It's very
Mr. Nobody:
# --- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# It's very much like the good old days of trigraphs. But on the plus
# side, once all the losers get their fonts/xterms/editors
# up-to-speed
# on extended character sets, the trigraphs will die a
# forgotten death.
#
# How about
--- Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Nobody:
# --- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# It's very much like the good old days of trigraphs. But on the plus
# side, once all the losers get their fonts/xterms/editors
# up-to-speed
# on extended character sets, the trigraphs
On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 08:57 AM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2003-01-16 at 11:41:56, Dan Sugalski wrote:
And keyboards, don't forget keyboards. These pesky primitive ones we
have now would require a lot of shift-control-alt-meta-cokebottle key
sequences...
Unicode may have thousands of
Glad to see someone heeded that warning about unrecognizable sarcasm;
no danger of misinterpretation here . . . :)
On 2003-01-16 at 10:01:04, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but *I'm* planning on making
many, many Unicode synonyms, to make my code shorter and more
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but *I'm* planning on making
many, many Unicode synonyms, to make my code shorter and more readable.
For example, Cfor is too long, so I want to just make it curly-f,
(Æ). And Cwhen is even longer, so I'm
--- Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I don't know about anyone else, but *I'm* planning on making
many, many Unicode synonyms, to make my code shorter and more readable.
For example, Cfor is too long, so I want to just make it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mr. Nobody) writes:
Argh, I just realized the original was probably sarcastic too. Now I look
like an idiot. Well, moreso than before.
There has been more than a touch of sarcasm about nearly every post in
this thread in the last two days.
--
So i get the chance to reread
--- Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may
well
be
considered reasonable thing
Sounds
Whoever is working for qlcomm.com tech support and subscribed from work
should probably unsubscribe and use a personal account, unless your
boss wants 20+ messages per day coming in to your corporate mailbox.
--- Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Customer,
Your query has been
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Mr. Nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
Ah, that's a different question. Having Unicode synonyms may
well
On 2003-01-16 at 16:42:15, Buddha Buck wrote:
[Note: I originally sent this to Mr. Nobody alone, but that wasn't my
intent. I'm re-sending it here, where I wanted it to go in the first
place. -- bmb]
This came in with a content type text/plain, charset=us-ascii.
US-ASCII is by definition 7
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 09:22:07AM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
On Jan-12, Nicholas Clark wrote:
IIRC Leo added an option to Configure.pl to turn on optimising.
Prior to this, on IRC Dan said to me that we need to avoid the hack that perl5
found itself in, when it had to retro-fit the
So I did it. Check in the first version of eval.
First of all, I changed pdd06_pasm, the compile and compreg opcodes
didn't fit really well into - well - my scheme of objects.
A compiler is now a Parrot class, derived from NCI, living in
interpreter-Parrot_compreg_hash. This also needed a change
I have a Perl program that processes Perl source and generates fake C++
headers that doxygen will process. Doxygen doesn't have a hook for adding a
new parser, so this is the only way to hack it. The doxygen way of doing
things depends pretty heavily on special comments. My doxygen hack pulls a
I still have most of yesterday's p6i mail to dig through (and
probably won't until this evening), but one thing that's struck me
(courtesy of an ill-timed grumble about objects) is that there are
really three ways to do inheritance, and most languages sort of do
them, with varying amounts of
The ability to download autodia off of the primary site and the mirror
is unfortunately broken.
-Tupshin
James Michael DuPont wrote:
--- Mitchell N Charity [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doxygen unfortunately doesn't handle perl code, and even has problems
with parrot's C.
You might be
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #20355]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=20355
I don't think the ifdef logic is quite right in cpu_dep.c. Specifically,
if
At 7:29 PM + 1/16/03, Andy Dougherty (via RT) wrote:
The enclosed patch changes the logic to what I suspect was actually
intended.
Applied, thanks.
--
Dan
--it's like this---
Dan Sugalski
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
So I did it. Check in the first version of eval.
Test status:
make test succeeds, as well as -P, running the eval progs with JIT or
with -t (trace)/-b (bounds) option fails, probably related to messing
with the byte code.
Fixed.
bug in -j was triggered by garbage
# New Ticket Created by Leopold Toetsch
# Please include the string: [perl #20358]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=20358
disassemble sometimes takes huge amounts of mem and dies.
I'm using disassemble
35 matches
Mail list logo
