On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 09:31:41AM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems like Perl6 is moving farther and farther away from Perl5's
(almost) typelessness.
It depends what you mean by typed. Perl has always had strongly typed
*values* (which strike me
Attribution lists are getting a bit complex. This is in response to what Piers wrote
on Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 03:50:44PM +.
DKS
[specifying types]
Hm. I'm way short on sleep today, so I'm probably missing something,
but I don't see why Perl can't sort this out without a specific
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:32:02AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
$obj.ID;
$obj.IDENTITY;
FWIW, I favor the latter.
--Dks
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 06:47:39PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mind you (purely devil's advocate), I'm not entirely sure the R-to-L
syntax truly _needs_ to be in Perl6. It's true I use it all the time,
but I can retrain to use L-to-R method calls
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 08:26:25PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 06:47:39PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I haven't been arguing against his syntax for adding L to R
pipelines, but against
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 03:44:21PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 11:12 AM -0800 12/16/02, Dave Storrs wrote:
You find R2L easier to read, I find L2R
easier. TIMTOWDI. Perl6 should be smart enough to support both.
Why?
Yes, technically we can do both R2L and L2R. We can also support
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:56:15AM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
Using the method/attribute named id for this is the same object
comparisons is just plain bad Huffman coding. The this is the same object
method/attribute should have a name that reflects the relative rarity of its
use.
FWIW, I
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:49:44AM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
Other common names for the proposed .id are:
UUID: Universal Unique Identifier (DCE)
GUID: Globally Unique Identfier (EFI)
Of the 2, usage of GUID seems to be more common IMHO. Both of the above
are identical in
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 12:13:49PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
[Dks wrote:]
So...are we intending that types and type safety will be like 'use
strict' (optional and only on request), or will they be like sigils
(mandatory, can't be turned off)? Or, perhaps, on by default but able
to be
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 10:35:47AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
Dave Storrs wrote:
- the ability for the programmer to set limiters (??better name??)
on the junction, which will specify how the junction should
collapse--e.g. always collapse to the lowest/highest value that hasn't
been
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 02:54:18PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After thinking about it a little more, I'll set myself on the yes
side. And propose either '===' or ':=:' to do it.
Definitely '==='.
Hopefully, this thread has been settled by Damian's
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a little language
that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
other syntax, as:
foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
I'm wondering whether Perl
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 03:58:54PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
From: Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My understanding was that in Perl6, you could use pretty much anything
for a hashkey--string, number, object, whatever, and that it did not
get mashed down into a string. Did I have this wrong
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 10:37:10PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
At what moment does a junction actually create all of its states?
Hmm...perhaps a clearer way to say that is At what moment does a
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:28:41PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
Dave Whipp wrote:
I notice everyone still want Int context for eval of the block:
Pease don't forget about hashes. Is there such a thing as
'hashkey context'?
I doubt it. Unless you count Str context.
My understanding was
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 09:35:16PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
is to use an alphabetic name (e.g. || vs or). perhaps the we
could name this operator Cpp: its vaguely remenicent of the
@out = @in
pp map { foo }
pp grep { bar }
pp sort { $^a = $^b }
I like the idea of
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:01:36AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
(Umm... what's a better name than coloned form? That term sounds
really... um... bad.)
How about:
- explicit radix
- dotted notation
- DSD (Dot Separated Digits)
--Dks
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 05:49:58PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ideally, there could even be a per-list switch and a global switch
that says (don't) show unique ids when interpolating lists/arrays.
By default, it gets set to show, but it can be turned
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:43:08PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
[ how should printed lists behave? ]
Please make the default behaviour 'debugging friendly' rather than
'pretty' if that makes any sense at all. In other words, it'd be handy
if whatever got printed out included some unique ID for
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:10:11PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Friday, November 22, 2002, at 10:59 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
From: Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've been under the impression that the following would _not_ work:
$s ~~ /number/;
print I found $number;
As
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 01:22:50AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
I actually rather like MikeL's suggestion for the unary ops; clear,
concise, and highly readable. And look:
my str $s = sprintf(%x, $i);# 30 characters
my str $s = hex $i; # 19 characters
my $s = ~hex $i;
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 01:29:32AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
As a tangent...one of the things that has bothered me about but and
is for properties since the beginning is that they make for
excessively long code. Does this bother anyone else?
--Dks
Properties have bothered me, but
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 03:26:09AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
Dave Storrs wrote
best solution. I just wish there were some way to get away from those
dratted sprintf format strings.
Well, for the general case, you could create convienence functions that
handle getting the correct format
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 02:41:33AM -0800, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Storrs) writes:
send in our Contributor License Forms. You can read all the license
details at:
http://snipurl.com/bkt
http://pdp.perl.org/contributor_agreement also sends you to that page
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:10:53AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:16:54PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
: As a tangent...one of the things that has bothered me about but and
: is for properties since the beginning is that they make for
: excessively long code. Does
Ok folks, this is your Friendly Neighborhood License-Form Thug calling:
For those who came in late, we all need to sign and submit a license
form saying that the Perl Documentation Project gets the IP on the
documentation we write.
The form is here: http://www.snipurl.com/bkt/ It contains
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:55:12PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
[eventual need to refuse stuff from unlicensed people]
Hard and fast? ie, patches, even for a simple typo? Or new work, as
corrections to a licensed document should imply concurrence.
I'm very glad to say that I'm not the one
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 12:11:21PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old oct/hex
: functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that:
What's a two-way function supposed to return if
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 01:23:04PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old oct/hex
:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:51:17PM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
It's going to be hard to beat sprintf( %x, $i ) for clarity or
conciseness.
Unfortunately, it's pretty easy to beat it for readability. It's also
a holdover from C, an ancestor language that we are (at least to a
degree) trying
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 11:50:52PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Lazzaro writes:
Let's summarize some of the string-to-num issues:
my int $i = literal 0xff; # 255
(3) -- We want to be able to parse a string as a number using a very
_specific_ rule; for
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:57:10AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
--- Numeric Literals ---
bin/oct/hex notation:
0b0110 # bin
0c0123 # oct
0x00ff # hex
0x00fF # hex, == 0x00ff
0x00FF # hex, == 0x00ff
I would assume that 0B0110, 0C0123, and
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 03:14:52PM +, Graham Barr wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 11:12:15PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
24*60*60:10 # one day in seconds, easy representation
And the advantage of that over 24*60*60*10 would be ?
Well, for one thing, my version means 1 day
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:58:55PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
Hi all,
Hi Angel,
This is the numeric literals part, reformated to follow Michael's
outline.
My contribution is some copyediting and a few suggestions. Take what
you think is worthwhile.
Greetings all,
Allison has asked me to be the coordinator to make sure that we all
send in our Contributor License Forms. You can read all the license
details at:
http://snipurl.com/bkt
Basically, what it comes down to is that we need everyone to sign a
document saying that, for all
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 03:01:08PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote:
On 15 Nov 2002 at 12:02, Dave Whipp wrote:
A couple more corner cases:
$a = 1:0; #error? or zero
Shouldn't base-1 be:
1:0 == 10:0
1:1 == 10:1
1:11 == 10:2
1:111 == 10:3
1:1010111 == 10:5
etc..
Nope. Remember, for
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 08:13:58PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:51:05 -0800
From: Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Therefore, in base 1, you can only use the digit 0. (Actually, I
think base 1 is a corner case--you only get one digit, but that digit
is 1, so you
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 02:29:38PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
It is interesting that no one has yet taken the time to start defining the
terms we're using.
Good point. I volunteered to be keeper of the glossary a while ago,
but I never actively started creating one. That said, let's make
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:03:32PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:24:50AM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
: Also, on this subject...what happens if I want to use letter notation
: in a base higher than 36?
What happens then is that people will think you're silly
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:33:31PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:28:38AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
1.23_e_4# ok?
Hrm. This one is annoying, but I think it should be okay.
Are you sure? If so, can you explain why for me, because I don't
think it
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:02:02PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
$b = 4294967296:1.2.3.4 # base 2**32
Hmm, interesting. Just as an aside, this gives me an idea: would it be
feasible to allow the base to be specified as an expression instead of
a constant? (I'm pretty sure it would be useful.)
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 12:33:09PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
Larry
Does this mean that you can't use _ in numbers if the radix is higher than 16? (For
example, in base
[examples of how to create the glossary links snipped]
Assuming that we do go with the maintain a unique list of keys in %glossary, then do
an s/// approach, I'd be willing to maintain the list of terms.
--Dks
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:06:13PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
I wonder if it'd be feasible to do lists something like:
[...]
=* level1
= level2
=+ level3
=* level4
= level3
= level1
I personally like the idea of keeping the '=' required, to be
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:16:53PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:06:13PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
Or if the leading = really must be required:
=* level1
= level2
=+ level3
=* level4
= level3
= level1
What
Is anyone else getting all the traffic from this list twice? I don't get it from any
of the other p6 lists, so I'm not quite sure what's up.
--Dks
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
If no one saw them then it could well be a problem on my end.
I'm trying to use a mailer (pine) that doesn't know about UTF-8 in
a «+» b
I'm using Pine 4.33 on FreeBSD 4.3, and I see these fine.
--Dks
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote:
for a; b - $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] };
I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved
if the above were just written:
for (a;b) - ($x is rw; $y
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
for @a - $x; @b - $y { $x = $y[5] };
Yes!!!
(Except for the ''. That's feigen-ugly.
*shrug* You may not like the aesthetics, but my point still
stands: is rw is too long for something we're
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
Dave Storrs wrote:
Actually, yes, that would solve everything for me...and I knew
this was valid syntax.
So is this vertical layout, which I think will become fairly standard
amongst those who care about readability:
for a ; b
In the Re: Wh[ie]ther Infix Superposition ops thread
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
But given a decent Collection hierarchy:
my $seen = Set.new($start,$finish);
for - $next {
print $next unless $next =~ $seen;
$seen.insert($next);
}
Just a
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Angel Faus wrote:
Then let's make the parens required when there is more than one
stream.
Sane people will put them there anyway, and it will force the rest of
us to behave.
It also solves the ;-not-a-line-seperator problem.
-angel
Yes! Thank you, this
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Graham Barr wrote:
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:57:00PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
*shrug* You may not like the aesthetics, but my point still
stands: is rw is too long for something we're going to do fairly often.
I am not so sure. If I look back through a lot
.
Dave Storrs
somewhere, but I can't quite make it work.
Dave Storrs
Ah! Ok, yes, I had missed that. Thanks, this is exactly what I wanted.
Dave
On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, Stephen Rawls wrote:
Doesn't the :w option do that?
:w/one two/ translates to /one \s+ two/
Not exactly. The regex you showed would match any of these (using
underscores for
spaces
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Ken Fox wrote:
Dave Storrs wrote:
why didn't you have to write:
rule ugly_c_comment {
/
\/ \* [ .*? ugly_c_comment? ]*? \* \/
{ let $0 := }
/
}
Think of the curly braces as the regex quotes
, 7 Jun 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Dave Storrs wrote:
Just to be sure I understood: you meant that (A) yes, you can use
fail in a subroutine outside a regex, and (B) if you do, it is no
different from die. Is that correct?
Depends on the caller's use of use fatal
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Dave Storrs wrote:
I assume that 'fatal.pm' is a new pragma.
Already exists for Perl 5, actually.
*blush* Must have missed it. Drat, and I just finished rereading
Camel III. Apologies.
Dave
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Luke Palmer wrote:
Dave Storrs wrote:
Can we please have a 'reverse x' modifier that means treat whitespace as
literals? Yes, we are living in a Unicode world now and your data could
/FATAL ERROR\:Process (\d+) received signal\: (\d+)/
I don't see how
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
Dave Storrs wrote:
Somehow, this feels like we're trying to roll all of Prolog
into Perl,
No. We're rolling in all of yacc/lex/RecDescent instead. ;-)
And this should reassure me _why_? *grin*
Just to verify, this:
s:3rd /foo3
Well, A5 definitely has my head spinning. The new features seem amazingly
powerful...it almost feels like we're going to have two equally powerful,
equally complex languages living side-by-side: one of them is called
Perl and the other one is called Regexes. Although they may talk to
one
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Luke Palmer wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
No configuration files (.e.g .cpan) are necessary. However, you can use a
configuration file if you want tp indicate a .cpan-like file
cpan --conf ~/.cpan load Date::EzDate
What about no
.
Is there a way to do this now? If not, will there be a way in
Perl6?
Dave Storrs
[Several people said something like $var is rw will do it)
Ah, that's right. I had forgotten about this.
Thanks to everyone who responded.
Dave
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
print There's a letter in here!\n if (substr($pi, 0, 200) =~ /[a-z]/);
*shrug* I actually did think of that when I first proposed this;
doesn't substr make a fresh copy of the string? (I honestly don't know.)
What happens if you take a
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
There is an issue of time--what do we do, for example, in the case:
my $pi = Pi::Generate;
if ($pi =~ /[a-z]) {
print There's a letter in here!\n;
}
if Pi::Generate returns a generator object that will calculate pi for
you to
. How about proceed?
Ted
First, a 'me too' to everything Ted said.
Second, to me 'nobreak' is not sufficiently visually distinct from
'break'.
Dave Storrs
to this (in Perl5 terms):
# This Perl6:
for $_ - $x { ... }
# is the same as this Perl5:
{
my $x = $_;
local ($_);
{ ... }
}
Dave Storrs
In strings.pod, the following string functions are documented and
(most|all) are already implemented:
DOCUMENTED:
chopn
concat
length
substr
string_nprintf
However, Perl5 also includes the following functions that operate on
or otherwise relate to
I've been offline for a few days and haven't caught up on email yet
(nor, most likely, will I ever), so I hope no one else has already
done this, but
Attached is a file, msv.tar.gz which contains a simple script and .pm
file (*) for editing the string vtable. It asks you for a bunch of
(As previously remarked, I'm trying to catch up from a few days offline,
so excuse me if this is OOD.)
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Ken Fox wrote:
The interpreter knows the internals of the stack structure and is
responsible for managing it. To change the stack implementation, we'll
have to
How would this handle code and/or packages that are generated at run
time? Or would that be another caveat?
Dave
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Steve Simmons wrote:
Perl6 should ship with a simple utility that shows all modules a program
uses, and all modules those modules use.
Presumably with
numbers, does it support threads and (if so) what
threading model (though this is probably a moot point in P6, perhaps it
is something that could be included into 5.8.x).
Dave Storrs
=head1 TITLE
API for the Perl 6 debugger.
=head1 VERSION
1
=head2 CURRENT
Maintainer: David Storrs ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Class: Internals
PDD Number: ?
Version: 1
Status: Developing
Last Modified: August 18, 2001
PDD Format: 1
Language: English
=head2
The Dragon Book is (AFAIK) still considered the definitive book on the
subject. It's called that because it has (or at least, had, for the
edition that I bought) a red dragon on the cover.
The official title is:
Compilers : Principles, Techniques, and Tools
by Alfred V. Aho, Ravi Sethi,
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Johan Vromans wrote:
Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I discovered today that I had forgotten to put 'use strict' at the top of
one of my modules...it was in the script that _used_ the module, but not
in the module itself. Putting it in instantly caught
On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Dan Brian wrote:
The debugger API PDD that I submitted a couple of days ago suggested that
we incorporate a profiler into the core. What do people think of this
idea?
I think that with a clean API, many third-party profilers could and would
be created. I am
On Sat, 21 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 21, 2001 at 02:47:43PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
It would be nice if there was a
use strict 'recursive';
option that you could set in a script or module (package, whatever) which
would force all the modules it used
First topic:
I discovered today that I had forgotten to put 'use strict' at the top of
one of my modules...it was in the script that _used_ the module, but not
in the module itself. Putting it in instantly caught several annoying
bugs that I'd been trying to track down.
It would be nice if
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
For example, the
going back in time and preventing your grandparents from having sex
situation.
Bah, who needs sex these days? A little in vitro here, a little
cloning with genetic tweaking there...a whole new person, no sex
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 01:37:23AM -0500, Me wrote:
BD languages
What's BD?
Bondage and Discipline, scum! You're not a good enough programmer to
be trusted not to make mistakes! Now drop and give me fifty!
Hmmm...Michael, I
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Chris Hostetter wrote:
After reading the Apocalypse Exegesis articles, and seeing some examples
of properties and the is operator, I'd like to suggest that the
less-then operator be changed, so it is functionally equivalent to:
$v2 = VALUE2;
$v1 =
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 01:34:35PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
I cannot imagine running an enterprise critical application
As a complete digression, can we please strike the term enterprise
from the English lexicon? Completely
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Hugo wrote:
I'd also like to see a specification for indentation when breaking long
lines.
Fwiw, the style that I prefer is:
someFunc( really_long_param_1,
(long_parm2 || parm3),
really_long_other_param
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I'd say no, Perl can't know at compile-time if your method is
declared or not. Only in certain restricted cases, such as if you
don't inherit from anything, or if *all* your parent classes are
declared strictly.
(By 'strictly', I
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Dave Mitchell wrote:
dispatch loop. I'd much rather have a 'regex start' opcode which
calls a separate dispath loop function, and which then interprets any
further ops in the bytestream as regex ops. That way we double the number
of 8-bit ops, and can have all the
On Tue, 22 May 2001, Graham Barr wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:29:33PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
We actually want the possibility of that kind of namespace collision:
for polymorphism.
Many people keep bringig this up as a confusion and you give the same reply.
With the
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 10:01:28AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
Would you also advocate separate declarative syntax for variable
properties and value properties? That's where I think much confusion
will be.
Yes, I would. What
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
So, if I have a Dog $spot, here's a little table where a 1 in the M
column means $spot has a bark method that says 'woof', 1 in the V column
means $spot has a bark variable (compile-time) property that says 'arf'
and a 1 in the A column means
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Maybe there are two different features being conflated here. First, we
have is, which is really for assigning permanent properties:
my $PI is constant = '3.1415927';
So, those make sense, and we'd want them to remain through assignment.
Hmmm...ok, on thinking about it, I generally agree with you.
There is only one point that I would debate (and, as you'll see, there's
a solution for that one, too):
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Dave Storrs writes:
1) One of the great strengths of Perl
Ok, this is basically a bunch of me too!s.
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Awesome. Simple, Perlish, easy to read, etc. Also, I see you took the
suggestion of:
Access through... Perl 5 Perl 6
= == ==
Array slice
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:30:07PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
- A while ago, someone suggested that the word 'has' be an alias
for 'is', so that when you roll your own properties, you could write
more-grammatically-correct statements
I recently received the following email from someone whose name I
have snipped.
* Dave Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] [05/16/2001 08:11]:
Ok, this is basically a bunch of me too!s.
Keep the snide comments to yourself. Thanks.
This was regarding a reply I had made to one
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Dave Storrs writes:
SARCASM=EXTREME
Everyone, please try to stop the downhill descent of the conversation.
This is not just Dave, but others in the thread too.
For the record, the original post in this sequence came from David
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 11:14:57AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
afraid of, and to express your concerns about it. However, the way that
you chose to do that (Once quick and dirty dies, Perl dies.) implies
that the only thing that Perl is good
by using such inflammatory language...it makes me
(and probably others) focus more on your tone than on your point.
Dave Storrs
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Adam Turoff wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:57:42AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
It doesn't look to me like the amount of Perl one needs to know to achieve
a given level of productivity is increasing in volume or complexity at
all. What it looks like to me is that
First of all: Damian, thank you for putting this together. This is a
really good way to dispell the concerns/doubts/pick-a-word that people
(including myself) have been having about whether Perl6 would be the
language that we all know and love.
There was a great deal of stuff in there and I
1 - 100 of 177 matches
Mail list logo
