I've just finished a big update to the Perl 6 Workplace Wiki. It got big
enough that I started splitting it into subsidiary pages. The main page is
still pretty long, but I've added a table of contents to make it easier to
find things on it.
Please give it a look, and please add useful stuff
I tried to compile pugs r12925 with parrot r14364 (both current as of
yesterday) and make for pugs failed with this message:
...
...
/KNOPPIX/usr/bin/perl util/gen_prelude.pl -v -i src/perl6/Prelude.pm
-p ./pugs --output blib6/lib/Prelude.pm.yml
Generating precompiled Prelude... ./pugs -C
# FYI. The note below was originally posted on perl.perl6.users.
# Thought some folks here should also be interested in this.
#
# Background:
#
# http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.internals/34764
# Announcing the Perl 6 and Parrot wiki workspaces
#
#
Audrey Tang skribis 2006-09-01 19:10 (+0800):
Because of the awkward syntax that goes with a method: two parens, four
delimiters, comma[s]?.
.s(/bar/, baz); # 20 keypresses on a US keyboard
Minor nit, but:
.s: /bar/,'baz'; # 17 keypresses...
And since it's something used a lot in
On 9/2/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/9/2, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I tried to compile pugs r12925 with parrot r14364 (both current as of
yesterday) and make for pugs failed with this message:
Heya. r12925 is at the middle of gaal's mad hax0ring to support
:(Sig) syntax
2006/9/2, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I tried to compile pugs r12925 with parrot r14364 (both current as of
yesterday) and make for pugs failed with this message:
Heya. r12925 is at the middle of gaal's mad hax0ring to support
:(Sig) syntax in addition to \(Capt) syntax. Can you try
Paul == Paul Seamons [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul I don't know what the reasoning was back then and it may be the same
today.
From my early conversations with Larry, I recall that the reason is that
RSTS/E BASIC-PLUS had nested trailing modifiers, and both Larry and I saw many
abuses of
:($x where {...} is elk)# ambiguous auxillary
Is this legal? does the 'elk' trait pertain to $x or to the where-block?
:($x is ro is rw) # conflicting traits
Is this legal? Is $x ro or rw?
--
Gaal Yahas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gaal.livejournal.com/
Paul Seamons schreef:
In the samples you gave I had to read the entire line to see
what the outcome of the code is.
I was not addressing reading skills, but just your you'd either have
... or One always needs to read the full line, but one doesn't
have to do that linearly or just from
Mark Stosberg wrote:
::($meth)(self:);
Well, audreyt just made this work (r12960), which I what I what
I thought should work in the first place:
self.$meth().
So I'm happy. (But my curiosity about the spec for symbolic refs and OO
still stands. )
Mark
On 9/2/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/9/2, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 9/2/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/9/2, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I tried to compile pugs r12925 with parrot r14364 (both current as of
yesterday) and make for pugs failed
2006/9/2, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 9/2/06, Audrey Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/9/2, Markus Laire [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I tried to compile pugs r12925 with parrot r14364 (both current as of
yesterday) and make for pugs failed with this message:
Heya. r12925 is at the middle
Alberto Simões wrote:
Hi
I created a ticket in RT two days ago (well, one day ago) and still
waiting for it to be created, so, forget RT and here it goes.
One more day, and no ticket yet. I wonder what is happening.
Talked with Leo already and he thinks this is a good approach, but as it
On 9/2/06, Alberto Simões [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alberto Simões wrote:
Hi
I created a ticket in RT two days ago (well, one day ago) and still
waiting for it to be created, so, forget RT and here it goes.
One more day, and no ticket yet. I wonder what is happening.
i've forwarded a
Mark Summersault asked what the license for this Wiki is going to be.
Below is what I plugged in for the time being. It's my best guess of what
the leading lights of #perl6 and @Larry would be reasonably happy with (and
thus it should also be appropriate for something eventually living on or
near
Hello,
I think it would helpful if the spec addressed who wins in MMD when
optional arguments are present.
I just submitted these failing tests for pugs which illustrate the
issue.
not ok 11 - Arguments (a = 'b') to signatures 1. () and 2. (*%h) calls 2
not ok 14 - Arguments () to signatures 1.
Mark Stosberg wrote:
Hello,
I think it would helpful if the spec addressed who wins in MMD when
optional arguments are present.
I just submitted these failing tests for pugs which illustrate the
issue.
not ok 11 - Arguments (a = 'b') to signatures 1. () and 2. (*%h) calls 2
not ok 14
Mark Stosberg wrote:
Hello,
I think it would helpful if the spec addressed who wins in MMD when
optional arguments are present.
I just submitted these failing tests for pugs which illustrate the
issue.
not ok 11 - Arguments (a = 'b') to signatures 1. () and 2. (*%h) calls 2
not ok 14
I don't follow your examples. What is the logic behind them?
On 9/3/06, Mark Stosberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Examples:
Arguments (1 2) to signatures 1. (@a?) and 2. (@a) calls 2
For example, I would expect this one to be ambiguous, because the 1.
(@a?) sub introduces two different
Further digging shows this is simply bug #40069 ([PGE] value can't
be used as a rule name), and avoiding that issue works even without
my patch applied.
On Sep 1, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Will Coleda wrote:
Trying to implement a JSON parser in PGE:
SNIP
--
Will Coke Coleda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
S12 describes a feature to call sets of methods at the same time:
http://feather.perl6.nl/syn/S12.html#Calling_sets_of_methods
I would like the spec to clarify what happens to the return values of
all these methods.
I'm fine with a simple answer, such as that they are not available, or
only
From my early conversations with Larry, I recall that the reason is that
RSTS/E BASIC-PLUS had nested trailing modifiers, and both Larry and I saw
many abuses of these over the years. Therefore, he decided not to repeat
that abomination, limiting it to precisely one level deep. I'm happy for
Yeah, every once in a while, I've wanted the second layer, but I'm
willing to rewrite the statement as a true normal if/while instead of a
backwards if/while, and it *does* help the overall readability.
I'd concede that the actual useful uses are rare enough to not warrant
giving a
23 matches
Mail list logo
