[PATCH] typos in rx.ops

2003-04-02 Thread Cal Henderson
patch to correct typos in rx.ops patch follows sig -cal -- --- rx.ops Thu Jan 9 00:00:17 2003 +++ rx.ops.2Wed Apr 2 23:28:13 2003 @@ -135,11 +135,11 @@ There are two basic rules to how the opcodes operate. -The first rule is that the first argument to each opcode is the string w

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Yary Hluchan
>This isn't quite meaningful. What does a "non-letter atom" mean? > >If you're processing a file or a string, that's the basic P6 model. > >But consider \u for unicode -- that's a multi-byte object in the >stream. So for streams of bytes, the right way is just to code Ccolor> such that it recogniz

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Yary Hluchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for the thoughtful consideration. Austin's given some high- > level examples of the kind I was hoping for, > > "AH>" = Austin Hastings > > AH> grammar Rainbow; > AH> use Colorific; # Import C and C, among others. > AH> > AH> What I don't kn

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Joseph F. Ryan
Austin Hastings wrote: Another example. Let's say there's a class that deals with colors. It has an operator that returns true if two colors look about the same. Given a list of color objects, is there a regexp to find a rainbow? Even if the color class doesn't support stringification? Yes

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Andrew Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:16:37AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > > And the Colorific class supposedly has a way to determine if two > colors > > look about like each other. Again, I don't know how that works, but > I > > don't need to. > > > >> A

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Yary Hluchan
W= Andrew Wilson, AH=Austin Hastings AH> This is really probably bad code. Maybe a better rule would be: AH> AH> rule same_color($color is Colorific) AH> { AH>::: { fail unless $color.looks_like($1); } AH> } AH> AH> I KNOW that $color is an object-of-type-Colorific, while I'm not sure, AH> fra

Re: == vs. eq

2003-04-02 Thread Paul
Error correction: --- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > no idea how adverbial modification would affect that. Exactly > > > what *would* adverbial assignment be? Would > > > $a =:\ $b > > > be like > > > $a = \$b Thatv should have been: would $a =:\ $b be like \$a = \$b ??? And

Re: == vs. eq

2003-04-02 Thread Paul
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Likewise, I could argue that it be called C<=:\> (the > > > "disgruntled muppet" operator?) since that reflects the > > > "equals, under reference" symbolog

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Andrew Wilson
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:16:37AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > And the Colorific class supposedly has a way to determine if two colors > look about like each other. Again, I don't know how that works, but I > don't need to. > >> AH> rule same_color($color is Colorific) >> AH> { >> AH>

Re: A6: Named vs. Variadic Parameters

2003-04-02 Thread Paul
--- David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > > I think newbies are going to unquestionably try and put the > > parameters in the same order as they expect to see the eventual > > arguments, and be durn confused it doesn't work --

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Yary Hluchan
Thanks for the thoughtful consideration. Austin's given some high- level examples of the kind I was hoping for, "AH>" = Austin Hastings AH> grammar Rainbow; AH> use Colorific; # Import C and C, among others. AH> AH> What I don't know is how to recognize a color, which is to say I don't AH> kno

Re: A6: Named vs. Variadic Parameters

2003-04-02 Thread David Storrs
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: > I think newbies are going to unquestionably try and put the parameters > in the same order as they expect to see the eventual arguments, and be > durn confused it doesn't work -- I know I would. [...] > Dunno. I'm just one dat

Re: Conditional Cs?

2003-04-02 Thread Me
>given baz(@args) { return $_ when defined } >given baz(@args) { return $_ when $_ > 0 } Sweet. Shouldn't the latter example be: given baz(@args) { return $_ if $_ > 0 } In general, if a C condition clause contains a C<$_>, chances are good that it's a mistake, right? If a pipe short

Re: Conditional Cs?

2003-04-02 Thread Dave Whipp
Reading A6, I was wondering if the following would work: sub return_if_true ($value) { if ($value) { leave where=>caller(1), value=>$value } }

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Austin Hastings
I'm reordering this post rather than retype stuff. Forgive me. --- Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > for the p6 regex impaired among us, please explain that. it might > make a nice tute for the docs. i get the general picture but i don't > follow how it works regarding the color checking.

Re: == vs. eq

2003-04-02 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Likewise, I could argue that it be called C<=:\> (the "disgruntled > > muppet" operator?) since that reflects the "equals, under > reference" > > symbology. But that's yucky. > > Shouldn't that be ==:/ (ma

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Uri Guttman
> "AH" == Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: AH> grammar Rainbow; AH> rule color {...}; # this one's on you. AH> rule same_color($color is Colorific) AH> { AH>::: { fail unless $1.looks_like($color); } AH> } AH> rule band($color is Colorific) AH> { AH> +

Re: == vs. eq

2003-04-02 Thread Paul
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Likewise, I could argue that it be called C<=:\> (the "disgruntled > muppet" operator?) since that reflects the "equals, under reference" > symbology. But that's yucky. Shouldn't that be ==:/ (maybe the "severely startled muppet" operator? lol...)

Re: Ruminating RFC 93- alphabet-blind pattern matching

2003-04-02 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Yary Hluchan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A couple nights ago I read RFC93 as discussed in Apoc. 5 and got > fired up- it reminded me of some ideas from when I was hacking > Henry Spencer's regexp package. How to futher generalize regular > expression input. It's a bit orthoginal- a properly

Re: == vs. eq

2003-04-02 Thread Austin Hastings
--- Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One thing we should clear up is that we already *have* a generic > comparator, C<~~>, depending on what you mean by "generic". It can > be > made to compare things however you like, according to whatever > standard > of similarness you decide

Re: Conditional Cs?

2003-04-02 Thread Peter Haworth
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:01:48 +0300, arcadi shehter wrote: > Damian Conway writes: > >given baz(@args) { return $_ when defined } > >given baz(@args) { return $_ when $_ > 0 } > ># etc. > > since we have 2 forms of "return" -- "return" and "leave" , may be we > can make "return" also

Re: IMCC Changes necessary for Win32 builds

2003-04-02 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Clinton A. Pierce wrote: s/CONST/CONSTX/ anywhere in the parser & lexer. Keeps Win32 headers happy as previously mentioned. Thanks. Will check it in soon. NMAKE : fatal error U1073: don't know how to make 'FORCE' Stop. Removing the .FORCE references gets me something that builds obje

Re: imcc: basic_block 0 in loop

2003-04-02 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Steve Fink wrote: Why is this an error? I think I only encountered this because I had another bug in my code, but what is wrong with looping back to the beginning of a subroutine: This is related to the current fixes WRT flow control, subroutines and calling conventions, which is not finished y

Re: error in parrot assembly description set_global

2003-04-02 Thread Leopold Toetsch
K Stol wrote: Hello, In parrot_assembly.pod is the instruction "set_global" defined as: store_global Px, sy Store X in the default global symbol table with a name of Y. Yep. But this is not the only flaw in this file. Many opcodes are either outdated or not yet implemented (I'm not always su

Re: #21759 ticket

2003-04-02 Thread Leopold Toetsch
Alberto Simões/EPL wrote: Hi Only to ask to someone (well, someone with parrot CVS access) to read this ticket and send comments. :-) Looks good. Of course the info about arrays is availabe in some other docs (probably scatterd between some) so having a document for all array related things i

Re: Short-circuiting user-defined operators

2003-04-02 Thread Matthijs van Duin
Is there any specific reason this was a reply to Michael Lazarro's "Re: == vs. eq" dated Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:30:00 -0800 ? (What I mean is, PLEASE don't use reply when you're not replying at all) -- Matthijs van Duin -- May the Forth be with you!