l, but I also
> agree that piling stuff into regex's is getting really hairy. Hence the
> reason I withdrew from this discussion pending others' ideas of
> alternatives.
>
I too am looking forward to the alternative MJD has promised. Until
that
time, perhaps RFC145 should be
(?=) etc., and use
this power where the fundamental thingy being matched is not a
character.
Now, if you want the syntax for this, that's an entirely separate issue
(well, not really). But let's start with the question of weather this
is Einsteinian or ElmerFuddian.
--
David Corb
like these could easily be added by
> those who need them?
>
In principle, that's a very Perlish thing to do...
> -Scott
> --
> Jonathan Scott Duff
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s.
>
> The other thing that this doesn't handle is tags with no closing
> counterpart, like:
>
>
>
> Perhaps for these the easiest thing is to tell people not to use ?< and
> ?>:
>
>/(?)(?>)/;
>
> Would match
>
>
>
should specify for each
> element what the matching element is perhaps
>
> (?[( => ),{ => }, 01 => 10)
>
> sort of hashish in style.
>
> Perhaps the brackets could be defined as a hash allowing (?[%Hash)
>
> Richard
>
> --
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>|])/;
>
Let's combine yor operator with my example from above where everything
inside the (?m) or the ?(M)
fits the syntax of a RE.
/(?m(<<)|\[).*?(?M(>>)|(\]))
> Then the ?M matches pairs with the previous ?m, if there was one that
> was matched. The | char
I never saw one comment on this, and the more I think about it, the more
I like it. So,
I thought I'd throw it back out one more time...(If I get no comments
this time, I'll
be quiet :)
David Corbin wrote:
>
> I haven't given this a WHOLE lot of thought, so please, sho
y and there appears
> to be nothing more to say on the topic; it does not imply acceptance,
> rejection or a concensus view on the RFC.
>
> Comments, criticisms, etc. welcome.
>
> Updates to dev.perl.org/rfc/meta are scheduled for later this week.
>
> Z.
Can you p
at a project works best when it has a set of goals (I haven't
seen one yet really for Perl 6). Unless this is one of the goals, I can
easily see how this could become a serious distraction to what I
perceive as the likely goals of Perl6.
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t;
> This is very usefull for fast searching in DBM for example.
Way cool. I'd love this. But I think you've got your push arguments
backwards.
> PS.
> Perl6 should stay Perl, but must be more than Perl.
> Perl6 should be fast as mentioned in one RFC - but most importa
win, especially
> considering your thoughts about the module install system.
>
> What about Foo::Configuration?
>
> /Cajo.
>
> At 13.35 -0400 2000-08-25, David Corbin wrote:
> >There are several modules I've run across that require you to edit them
> >after yo
u want to skip tabs and
> spaces, put that sequence in.
>
> The only consequence would be that you'd have to be consistent in what
> you put in front of the text lines (and in the whitespace prefix
> definition).
>
> --
> Bart.
Why not make
it ugly (to you)? Just having to type an additional
character?
Do you have a better suggestion for separating variable type from
context?
>
> Um, don't know about hash{[a-c].*} though (apply regular expression and only
> keep keys that match)
>
> --
> Bron ( but I don't think the ugliness is worth it in the end.. )
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e to
be, so what do YOU think makes Perl Perl?
In addition to the four I posted, originally, I've added two. Here's my
working list.
native pattern matching;
list manipulation
aweswome text processing.
It's application glue (thanks Tim)
Ability to write powerful 1-line program
urable item is needed by a new revision that isn't in the old one
and warn the user.
I assume that this is really just another very small .pm file.
Thoughts?
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
like to see a set of "requirements" that make Perl what it is.
I think we all have a vague idea of what makes Perl great, but I'm also
sure there's a lot of variation. With a SHORT list of requirements, it
becomes much easier to address some of these issues that are radical
chang
;" or "/*".
- knowing what the closing match should be (when it's not obvious) as
in the above cases.
- (possibly) a problem when you've got many /m-/M pairs in a single RE
I've got some vague ideas on solving all of these, I'll go into
x".array[]."yy";
$x = "xx".@array[]."yy"; # not so sure about this one.
# I'm not sure at all about these - I tend to avoid interpolation of
arrays and hashes for "safety"
$x = "xx@{array}yy"
$x = "xx{array[]}yy"
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
he Matrix)
I think it would be a good thing, and would be another things can
distinguish Perl from the other languages like pattern matching once
did. It strikes me as one of those things that are going to end up
adding a whole lot of power that wasn't expected, once people figure
them
$name (qw/violet purple cream/) {
> push @funx, sub {
> print "I'll take a $name one, please, with @_.\n";
> };
> }
>
> --tom
Or consider this pseudo code -
open file
lock file
dump file
-
esigning the parser around regexes
> might indicate ways in which Perl's regexes are not yet powerful
> enough.
>
> Larry
That would be coolness.
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ill not be too tricky, it will require adding some work to C
> and adding more barewords to the local bareword board.
>
> --
> David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Laziness with responsibility http://www.tipjar.com/kcpm
--
David Corbin
Mach Turtle Technologies, Inc.
http://www.machturtle.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Corbin wrote:
>
> Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
> >
> >
> > So how do I make C into an array in the first place? Well, I say
> > something like C. But wait -- that's ambiguous! Is
> > C now a copy of the list (1,2,3) (in which case it's an array),
. Very
unambiguous.
>
> --
> Ariel Scolnicov|"GCAAGAATTGAACTGTAG"| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Compugen Ltd. |Tel: +972-2-6795059 (Jerusalem) \ We recycle all our Hz
> 72 Pinhas Rosen St.|Tel: +972-3-7658514 (Main office)`-
> Tel-Aviv 69512,
24 matches
Mail list logo
