Re: Command-line args (weekly contribution to P6)

2010-05-26 Thread Moritz Lenz
Hi David, thanks for your contribution. I'll review it thoroughly in the next few days. Am 24.05.2010 21:14, schrieb David Green: Also the line that sets the but False variations is commented out for now, because but isn't working. That's a reason why the challenge included only the

[perl #75348] [BUG] Can't call local sub from RHS of assignment to attribute declaration in Rakudo

2010-05-26 Thread Carl Mäsak
# New Ticket Created by Carl Mäsak # Please include the string: [perl #75348] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=75348 masak rakudo: class A { sub b { 0x10 }; has $!c = b }; A.new p6eval rakudo 4c94d7:

This Week's Contribution to Perl 6 Week 4: Implement :samecase for .subst

2010-05-26 Thread Hongwen Qiu
Hi! Attached are code and tests for my trying of implementing the :samecase for .subst. diff --git a/src/core/Cool-str.pm b/src/core/Cool-str.pm index 918ec68..42a2321 100644 --- a/src/core/Cool-str.pm +++ b/src/core/Cool-str.pm @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ augment class Cool { } } -multi

Re: Command-line args (weekly contribution to P6)

2010-05-26 Thread jerry gay
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 00:53, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote: The spec doesn't elaborate on how the short args are specified in the signature of MAIN. I see two possible approaches (that don't contradict): 1) one renames them in the signature, so it would like sub MAIN(:name(:$n))

Re: This Week's Contribution to Perl 6 Week 4: Implement :samecase for .subst

2010-05-26 Thread Moritz Lenz
Hi, Am 26.05.2010 16:19, schrieb Hongwen Qiu: Attached are code and tests for my trying of implementing the :samecase for .subst. Thank you very much for your effort and the patches, they are perfect. I've applied them both. Cheers, Moritz

Re: Command-line args (weekly contribution to P6)

2010-05-26 Thread Larry Wall
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 07:22:36AM -0700, jerry gay wrote: : On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 00:53, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote: : The spec doesn't elaborate on how the short args are specified in the : signature of MAIN. I see two possible approaches (that don't contradict): : : 1) one

r30811 -[S05] attempt to clarify :nth and :x

2010-05-26 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2010-05-26 18:55:57 +0200 (Wed, 26 May 2010) New Revision: 30811 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod Log: [S05] attempt to clarify :nth and :x Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod === ---

r30812 -[S03] explain how not-raising works on != and ne

2010-05-26 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2010-05-26 19:21:03 +0200 (Wed, 26 May 2010) New Revision: 30812 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod Log: [S03] explain how not-raising works on != and ne Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod

r30813 -[S03] typo

2010-05-26 Thread pugs-commits
Author: moritz Date: 2010-05-26 19:57:01 +0200 (Wed, 26 May 2010) New Revision: 30813 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod Log: [S03] typo Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod === ---

r30821 -[spec] Add Real.Int, Real.Rat, Real.Num, and Real.Complex to the spec.

2010-05-26 Thread pugs-commits
Author: colomon Date: 2010-05-26 21:29:50 +0200 (Wed, 26 May 2010) New Revision: 30821 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Numeric.pod Log: [spec] Add Real.Int, Real.Rat, Real.Num, and Real.Complex to the spec. Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Numeric.pod

Re: Command-line args (weekly contribution to P6)

2010-05-26 Thread David Green
On 2010-05-26, at 1:53 am, Moritz Lenz wrote: After playing with the first submission, the hash of types is what I found most useful. See http://github.com/moritz/process-cmd-args/blob/master/process-cmd-args.p6#L256 for some code that actually generates it by introspecting the signature

eqv and comparing buts

2010-05-26 Thread David Green
On 2010-05-26, at 1:53 am, Moritz Lenz wrote: The tests might need fixing too, since I'm not sure whether eqv (as used by is_deeply) would cover that, or whether it would take a separate test in bool context. probably the latter. I guess it would have to -- that is, but creates an ad-hoc

Re: eqv and comparing buts

2010-05-26 Thread Larry Wall
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:09:49PM -0600, David Green wrote: : On 2010-05-26, at 1:53 am, Moritz Lenz wrote: : The tests might need fixing too, since I'm not sure whether eqv (as used by is_deeply) would cover that, or whether it would take a separate test in bool context. : : probably the