# New Ticket Created by "abhijit mahabal"
# Please include the string: [perl #63634]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=63634 >
my @y = gather {
my $x = 0;
for 1..5 {
$x++;
Synposis 10...
abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
bytes, kilobyte;
replace the last line with:
&kilobytes := &kilobyte;
and the scoping is not an issue.
And with synonyms, binding as soon as declaring seems prudent.
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
x27;t topicalize the invocant nowadays? I had
thought that they do and one needs the ./ to still talk about the invocant
if some inner loop stole the $_, and until such stealing occurs .foo() and
./foo() are the same...
--abhijit
Damian
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
ays $_.method
./method is always $?SELF.method )
Yes, I like it a lot!
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
ke a topic. This is not
better than $o/$O, except that $__ looks more like $_ (but maybe it looks
too much like $_, and that alone could invalidate this proposal).
Comments?
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
On Mon, 2 May 2005, [ISO-8859-1] Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
David Storrs wrote:
Tell me what this does:
class Tree { method bark() { die "Cannot instantiate a Tree--it is
abstract!" }
}
class Birch { method bark() { return "White, papery" }
}
class Oak { method bark() { return "Da
On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Sat, 2005-04-30 at 22:24 +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 09:13:26AM -0500, Abhijit Mahabal wrote:
I do not see how any auto-threading occurs in that code. It is completely
innocuous in that sense, and I don't think that is
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 03:28:41PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
so we had junctions of Code references some days ago, what's with
junctions of Class and Role objects? :)
Could we see some code that shows
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 09:58, Abhijit Mahabal wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Aaron Sherman wrote:
It also might be useful for roles to be able to delete members and
methods from a class like so:
role foo {
has $.x;
has
, it
seems that the role would need to be the boss on "deleting decisions".
Could get pretty confusing!
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Luke Palmer wrote:
Chip Salzenberg writes:
I'd like to annotate Perl 6 parameters and other entities using
traits, since that's the best way (I know of) to have them appear
immediately in the text of the program where they are.
Supposing I had a "doc" trait, could I say:
su
Another edge case: is it legal to have an optional Pair in the
signature? That is:
sub foo($x, Pair ?$y, +$z){...}
If yes, what does this parse as:
foo(10, z => 5);
If z => 5 is bound to $y, then $y is almost mandatory. ('almost' because
we can still say foo(10); ). (and then can we als
I was thinking about how binding of arguments to parameters in a
sub/method call would happen. Seems to be a darn tricky thing with all
sorts of potential pitfalls!
I have a few questions. Consider the following piece of code. Are my
expectations correct?
sub foo($x, $y, *%slurp) { $x + $y }
s
A simpler buggy version:
sub g($x, $y){
say "$x $y";
h($y, $x);
}
sub h($x, $y){
say "$x $y";
}
g(10, 15);
=
This prints:
10 15
15 15
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal wrote:
the file examples/hanoi.p6 should work correctly, but does not.
the file examples/hanoi.p6 should work correctly, but does not.
Something is going wrong in the recursion.
=
[EMAIL PROTECTED] trunk]$ ./pugs examples/hanoi.p6
ndisks = 3
AS
AS
SS
AB
SS
SB
SB
=
A modified version that also prints out what arguments
I had not realized that "foo".say is valid p6 :)
Is "foo" .say also valid p6? No reason for it not to be valid
Pugs currently works with the non-space version, but barfs at the space
version...
In general, is this the right place to send pugs bug reports?
--abhijit
Autrijus Tang wrote:
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 04:14:34PM -0500, Abhijit Mahabal wrote:
I hunted down the cause of the non-parsing of
ok((2 + 3) == $five, "== (sum on lhs)");
in 03operator.t, but am not yet up to speed in Haskell to fix it.
Below is the location of the problem.
The e
I hunted down the cause of the non-parsing of
ok((2 + 3) == $five, "== (sum on lhs)");
in 03operator.t, but am not yet up to speed in Haskell to fix it.
Below is the location of the problem.
The error is in Parser.hs, in the blocks for parseApply and
parseParamList. parseApply eats parens using
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:05:32AM -0500, Abhijit Mahabal wrote:
: Consider a class (e.g., the hypothetical Geometry::Triangle) that can
: have several attributes (side1, side2, side3, angle1, ang_bisector1,
: side_bisector, altitude1 and so forth), most of which will not be
David Storrs wrote:
On Dec 15, 2004, at 5:36 PM, Abhijit Mahabal wrote:
I think that "slackness-on-demand" is a better policy than
"strictness-on-demand", but that, again, is just my opinion
Until now, the policy in Perl has always been that it is as slack and
forgiving
David Storrs wrote:
Incidentally, I just want to go on record as saying that the verbosity
of class declarations in P6 is really starting to skeeve me. I keep
reminding myself that these are the edge cases that are being discussed,
that you don't need all this stuff for the common case (right?)
Dave Whipp wrote:
Attributes are declared with C, but also have a unique signil
C<$.>. So is it strictly necessary to declare them? Or rather, is it
Cly necessary -- i.e. is the following legal?
no strict;
class Foo {
method bar {
say $.a++
}
}
For the standard layout, I'd think it'd be g
Consider a class (e.g., the hypothetical Geometry::Triangle) that can
have several attributes (side1, side2, side3, angle1, ang_bisector1,
side_bisector, altitude1 and so forth), most of which will not be
needed for most instances of Geometry::Triangle.
I know how this can be done in P5. Using
cause we'd be saying
$current_obj.cast($otherclass), and $otherclass would know it's own
layout.
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
;t know if it is doable or even desirable, but it sure
is cool!
Larry
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Larry Wall wrote:
: None of the synopses have anything like this. S6 talks about the
: types of values, but not keys. Oversight, or is this syntax dead?
S9 talk about it.
Oops. Sorry. So it was oversight after all :)
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu
A6 included examples of syntax for specifying the type of the key for a
hash:
my %pet is Hash(keytype => Str, returns => Cat)
None of the synopses have anything like this. S6 talks about the
types of values, but not keys. Oversight, or is this syntax dead?
--abhijit
Abhijit Mahabal
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Austin Hastings wrote:
> I was thinking about removing files this morning, and realized that I
> wish rm supported inclusion/exclusion.
>
> In particular, I wanted to remove "* but not Makefile" (since my
> Makefile uses lwp-download to re-fetch the source code, etc.)
>
> It
e role itself, and if the class
has a $.foo, it takes precedence" does not work because $.foo may have
been added by another role.
Abhijit Mahabal http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~amahabal/
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>OK, there's one non-incremental idea: documentation that you can write
>>in one place and display in some completely different order. (Shades of
>>literate programming!) And although there are good reasons for keeping
>>the docs in the same file as
31 matches
Mail list logo
