On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Juerd wrote:
open '', $foo;
open '', $foo;
is much harder to read than
open 'r', $foo;
open 'w', $foo;
Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree... not that MHO is particularly
important, I guess, but just to stress the fact that it is by large a
Larry Wall wrote:
I suppose another approach is simply to declare that dot is always a
metacharacter in double quotes, and you have to use \. for a literal
dot, just as in regexen. That approach would let us interpolate
things like .foo without a variable on the left. That could cause
a great
Rocco Caputo wrote:
On Sun, Jul 11, 2004 at 10:09:38PM +0200, James Mastros wrote:
All unreachable code is either people misusing the term unreachable, a
bug in Devel::Cover, or dead code that should be removed.
Here's a puzzle, then.
I just ran into a similar problem in POE::Driver::SysRW. For
On Thursday 15 July 2004 19:42, Michele Dondi wrote:
open '', $foo;
open '', $foo;
is much harder to read than
open 'r', $foo;
open 'w', $foo;
Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree... not that MHO is particularly
important, I guess, but just to stress the fact
On Thu 15 Jul 2004 11:42, Michele Dondi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Juerd wrote:
open '', $foo;
open '', $foo;
is much harder to read than
open 'r', $foo;
open 'w', $foo;
Are you sure?!? I would tend to disagree...
So do I. , and are
H.Merijn Brand skribis 2004-07-15 11:57 (+0200):
1. They do not ambiguate with files named 'r', or 'w'
Not a problem, assuming that these are named arguments as in:
open :r, $file;
open :w, $file;
open :rw, $file;
open :r :w, $file; # Hmm...
2. They don't have to be
Greg Boug skribis 2004-07-15 20:01 (+1000):
open FH, |/usr/bin/foo;
I'd love to be rid of -| and |-. I always have to RTFM to know which
one is which.
open :r :p, '/usr/bin/foo'; # Or :read :pipe
open :rp, '/usr/bin/foo';# IIRC, rules also let you combine
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Ph. Marek wrote:
Please take my words as my understanding, ie. with no connection to
mathmatics or number theory or whatever. I'll just say what I believe is
practical.
OT
As a side note, being what one would probably call a mathematically
oriented person, it is very
Figured I'd drop this note as I'm poking at this over lunch.
There's a number of opcodes that access attributes of the code
object. What I'm going to do is take advantage of the fact that we
stick the sub/method being called into P0, and hang attributes off of
that. I think this'll do what we
On Thu 15 Jul 2004 18:53, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Figured I'd drop this note as I'm poking at this over lunch.
if you try to pun the piethon spelling,
py-thong
would sound a lot sexier
There's a number of opcodes that access attributes of the code
object. What I'm going to do
At 6:57 PM +0200 7/15/04, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
On Thu 15 Jul 2004 18:53, Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Figured I'd drop this note as I'm poking at this over lunch.
if you try to pun the piethon spelling,
py-thong
would sound a lot sexier
It'll be Guido and I. Are you *sure* that sexier
On Wednesday 14 July 2004 12:58 pm, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Andrew Rodland wrote:
So if we have @x = [1, 3, 5, 6 .. 9, 10 .. Inf, 42];
...
42 is just one number, so questions of indexing
it are moot, but its distance from the left is Inf. So, there's no way
to access the 42 by
Greg Boug writes:
I have always felt that keeping ['' and ''] the same as shell
scripting was a handy thing, ...
Using C:w and C:r would at least match what C:w and C:r do in
'Vi' ...
Smylers
--- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Using C:w and C:r would at least match what C:w and C:r do in
'Vi' ...
That seems intuitive:
my $fh = open 'foo.txt', :w;
$fh.say Hello, world!;
$fh = open 'foo.txt', :e;# Ha, ha, just kidding!
$fh.say -EOF
If wifey shuns
Your fond
Greg Boug wrote:
I have always felt that keeping it the same as shell scripting was a handy
thing, especially when I have been teaching it to others. It also makes
the ol' perl5
open FH, |/usr/bin/foo;
make a lot more sense. Using something like
open p, /usr/bin/foo;
just
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Figured I'd drop this note as I'm poking at this over lunch.
There's a number of opcodes that access attributes of the code object.
What I'm going to do is take advantage of the fact that we stick the
sub/method being called into P0, and hang attributes off of that. I
think
At 10:19 PM +0200 7/15/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Figured I'd drop this note as I'm poking at this over lunch.
There's a number of opcodes that access attributes of the code
object. What I'm going to do is take advantage of the fact that we
stick the sub/method being called
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon skribis 2004-07-15 13:04 (-0700):
$in=open :r |/usr/bin/foo;
$out=open :w |/usr/bin/foo;
$both=open :rw |/usr/bin/foo;
No, thank you. Please let us not repeat the mistake of putting mode and filename/path
in one argument.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp/example$
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon writes:
My personal preference is for:
$in=open :r |/usr/bin/foo;
The pipe would be legal on either side of the string. This would
still allow the often-useful type a pipe command at a prompt for a
file,
And it still allows for all those security holes in
I can see from the testers page that Devel::Cover is supposed
to work on Windows.
Is there a ppd distribution of it somewhere so I can install
it on ActivePerl without a compiler ?
Currently if I type
ppm install Devel::Cover
I get version 0.2 of Devel::Coverage. Not what I wanted.
Gabor
# New Ticket Created by Lambeck
# Please include the string: [perl #30708]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30708
While creating an ebuild for Gentoo Linux I noticed that the installpath
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 11:29:59AM -0700, Lambeck wrote:
# New Ticket Created by Lambeck
# Please include the string: [perl #30708]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=30708
While creating an
On 7/15/2004 4:28 PM, Gabor Szabo wrote:
I can see from the testers page that Devel::Cover is supposed to work on
Windows.
I can confirm that it does.
Is there a ppd distribution of it somewhere so I can install it on
ActivePerl without a compiler ?
Not AFAIK, certainly not from
And language builtin namespaces in general. We need a standard, and
now's as good a time as any, so...
All language-specific builtin functions go into the _core_Language
namespace. (So for Python it's _core_Python, Perl 5 is _core_Perl5,
and so on)
--
Dan
On Friday 16 July 2004 02:46 am, Dan Sugalski wrote:
And language builtin namespaces in general. We need a standard, and
now's as good a time as any, so...
All language-specific builtin functions go into the _core_Language
namespace. (So for Python it's _core_Python, Perl 5 is _core_Perl5,
At 10:17 PM + 7/15/04, Steve Peters wrote:
On Friday 16 July 2004 02:46 am, Dan Sugalski wrote:
And language builtin namespaces in general. We need a standard, and
now's as good a time as any, so...
All language-specific builtin functions go into the _core_Language
namespace. (So for
Give or take. Lastest version of the translator's up, along with the
2.6 version of Python::Bytecode. It does, in fact, actually translate
python bytecode into viable PIR. Which Leo's already does, though
somewhat different bits.
Translator: http://www.sidhe.org/~dan/piethon/translator.pl
Right now in python.ops there's print_newline and print_item which
print a newline and an item. We need versions that take a filehandle
as the first parameter. (so it'd be print_newline filehandle and
print_newline filehandle thing)
Takers? C'mon, you know you want to :)
--
28 matches
Mail list logo
