Re: Revised Perl++ Wiki Proposal / $1k bounty

On 20/06/06, Conrad Schneiker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I propose to install twiki (http://www.twiki.org/) on Feather. This is a GPL'd Perl-based industrial-strength wiki. This would serve as the general Perl 6 wiki, aka Perl++. The source code would be placed in the Pugs .../other/... subtree

Re: Perl++ Wikicosm (was: OT: wiki engine architecture)

On 11/06/06, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 2) I agree that it is both important and pertinent to get the general requirements down for the project, but I do see a need and a benefit to having the architecture forming in the meanwhile. I see how these things can be connected, obviously, bu

Re: OT: wiki engine architecture

On 08/06/06, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Honestly, I'm not familiar with the Perl way of doing things, but I'm open to learn especially because I see the Perl community going through a (much-needed) reform. Thusly, I'm not familiar with the RFCs (Request For Change?) but I do see the mer

Re: OT: wiki engine architecture

On 08/06/06, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe this would be a good time to (semi-)formalize some form of recommendations for the project? Agreed. (We're talking about the minimal requirements to get the thousand for a pswiki, right?) Will this work like the Perl 6 RFC-Roundup, where t

Re: OT: wiki engine architecture (was: $1,000 prize for Perl 6 Wiki written in Perl 6)

On 07/06/06, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Let's use Perl 6 Grammars to define syntaxes. We are just about to get this mindblowingly awesome tool for parsing; why insist on tieing our feet together and having to hop around like that? This is the smartest suggestion I've yet seen on th

Re: Minimum modules for Production?

On 02/06/06, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * Michael Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-02 12:10]: > I would also point to PHP's fread() (and friends) functions, > which take "filenames" in the form of "C:\\blah" or > "http://foo

Re: Fwd: Minimum modules for Production?

On 01/06/06, Josh Wilmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At 12:00 on 06/01/2006 BST, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Basic I/O is talking to filehandles and nyetwork sockets. Anything > above the UDP / TCP level should not, IMO, be included. I'd respectfully disagree. Just like text isn'

Re: Minimum modules for Production?

If LWP isn't on the list I give it a vote. --michael

Re: Fwd: Minimum modules for Production?

On 30/05/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: but also so that people are encouraged to form various standard distributions, more along the lines of the Linux model. Since there could be multiple interpreters for Perl6, I wonder if you will see optimisations in the core of perl itself for

Re: Minimum modules for Production?

On 30/05/06, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If we have to pander to the clueless in order to make life easier for those in the trenches, I suggest that a Perl 6 distribution that includes as many modules as feasible be maintained as a strictly separate project. But the P5ish emphasis on

Re: Minimum modules for Production?

On 30/05/06, Amir E. Aharoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: BEEP-BEEP - for some reason, every time i hit "Reply" my reply is sent to the poster and not to the list. Is the bug in my mailer (GMail), my head, or the list server? I had the same problem with GMail, or at least how GMail tries to be "h

Re: CGI on 6

On 30/05/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 07:56:40AM +0100, Michael Mathews wrote: : Strangely %q<$n>.push($v); doesn't : work, but %q.{$n}.push($v); does. What's the difference? The first is equivalent to %q{'$n'}.push($v). I

Re: Minimum modules for Production?

On 30/05/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Since it looks like we're really going to have Perl6 within a year or so, what are the "must have" modules folks will want before they can consider using Perl6 in production? I vote for: 1) Unit testing, like Test::More; and 2) XML::Parser; --mich

Re: CGI on 6

On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 05:28:53PM -0700, Ovid wrote: > I also tried to do this: > my ($n, $v) = $nv.split('=').map(decode($_)); > That and a number of other variants all failed miserably with errors similar to: > Can't modify constant item: VStr ... Many thanks to Joel and ovid, your sugge

Re: CGI on 6

On 30/05/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I assume this is just an attempt to learn Perl6 and not to write a serious CGI parser? Assuming it's the former and not the latter, I don't really have much to comment on, though there are a few things I would change. How mysterious. Short of beggi

Re: CGI on 6

Whack three! I suddenly remember what it was like to learn Perl the first time again. Boy do I feel confused. It's starting to work though. Kinda like the first Perl CGI I wrote about seven years ago. Probably just as ugly too. Anyone want to join in here, please feel free! #!/usr/bin/pugs print

Re: CGI on 6

Whack number two. I *think* I've implemented URI decoding, with Juerd's help. I don't know how my hackish code will manage with various flavours of UTF (especially wide characters) but I'll leave that until it proves to be a problem. This works with my install of pugs. I still have some TODOs, if

Re: CGI on 6

On 28/05/06, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The exegeses are not updated to follow the current specifications. They're still useful, so they're kept around, but the syntax is out of date. Synopses are kept up to date. See http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S05.html Ah! I see. Thank you.

Re: CGI on 6

On 28/05/06, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Michael Mathews skribis 2006-05-28 15:46 (+0100): > Also is the operator "~~" or "=~"? I've found contradictory references > to both in books and online. It was "=~" in Perl 5, but it's &quo

Re: CGI on 6

On 28/05/06, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think you'll end up doing s:p5/// or however exactly it is spelled where you can just write a Perl 5 regex. #!/usr/bin/pugs my $v = "one+two+three"; $v =~ s/+/ /; print $v; prints... What's "" mean? Do I need to do something special to g

Re: CGI on 6

On 28/05/06, Andrew Shitov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Not first ;-) http://real.perl6.ru/p6/environment/ http://real.perl6.ru/p6/querystring/?one=alpha&two=beta&three=gamma&empty&four=delta http://real.perl6.ru/p6/cookie/ (refresh twice) http://real.perl6.ru/p6/queryhash/?one=alpha&two=beta&thre

Re: CGI on 6

Here's my first stab at a perl 6 cgi script. It's unusably slow under pugs, but that's a problem for the "optimisation people" :-) not me! If I'm reinventing the wheel here just tell me, but it's still a useful learning exercise (I'm embarrassed to tell you how long this took me to get working!).

CGI on 6

Thinking about the wiki on 6 challenge (would that be a "pliki"? a "sixwiki"? a "plixi"? erm-) I think the first hurdle would be getting CGI going on 6. Is this already proven? If so how? I'm investigating this now, but if someone wants to offer a working example... --michael

Re: $1,000 prize for Perl 6 Wiki written in Perl 6

On 27/05/06, Conrad Schneiker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So I'm offering to post a $1,000 prize (The AthenaLab "The 1st Extreme Leverage Prize" for Perl 6), to be awarded to the person that delivers the first (Perl 6)**2 Wiki that meets some moderate specifications. Now would that be New Zealan

Re: 3 Good Reasons...

On 26/05/06, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * Michael Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-26 12:45]: > In the end it was decided to rewrite that chunk in Perl. I can > tell you, there definitely was cursing in the office that day, > and I doubt anyone there woul

Re: 3 Good Reasons...

> As I gradually learn how Parrot works, I see that perhaps the idea of > decompiling byte-code into language ___ is only a pipe-dream. But the > point still remains--using the fact that one *could* mix languages X, > Y, and P into your company's source tree is a very weak argument for > Parrot/Pe

Fwd: 3 Good Reasons...

IL PROTECTED]> wrote: "Michael Mathews" schreef: > [compile down to a *language independent* format] > So does that mean I can write a module in Perl 6, deliver it to Mr. > Customer as byte-code. Then Mr. Customer can "decompile"(?) it into > Python (or JavaScript

Fwd: 3 Good Reasons...

On 25/05/06, Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "Michael Mathews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So my question to the list is, in simple terms even an IT manager > could grasp, explain what problems Perl 5 has that Perl 6 fixes, > such that they would want to u

Re: Perl 6 Wiki -- 2 more possibilities, & further discussion.

ble as soon as possible?) If so, how much more encouragement do you need to proceed? > From: Michael Mathews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > As a competing suggestion, how about... > http://pugs.kwiki.org/?perl6 Very interesting. But did you look at it? :-) I found this on the home page lin

Fwd: eval

oo"; } or say "error: $!" On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 01:08:42 +0100, Michael Mathews wrote: > This works... > > #!/usr/bin/pugs > my $code = "sqawk("; > eval $code or say $!; > say "but still running."; > > it prints out... > unex

Re: 3 Good Reasons...

-michael On 24/05/06, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: - Original Message From: Michael Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So my question to the list is, in simple terms even an IT manager > could grasp, explain what problems Perl 5 has that Perl 6 fixes, such > that they

Re: 3 Good Reasons...

Ah, perfect example Daniel. I know people say things like "Java is better for big projects because of the strictness of it's typing". I respond that Perl isn't intrinsically sloppy if you practice good coding, it just doesn't straightjacket you into that all the time. So here's Perl 6 and it has

3 Good Reasons...

Open Question: I realise I haven't kept up with every detail since the Perl6 RFC I submitted way back in August 2000, but boy was I surprised to find, now that I can actually use Perl6, it isn't just an improvement to Perl (5), it's actually a "different language" (I'm quoting Michael Schwern the

Re: (Existing) Perl 6 Wiki: (http://perl.net.au/wiki/Perl_6)

(for me at least) would help. --michael On 24/05/06, Michael Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Conrad, It's only an issue of coordination and findability. But that question depends on what the intended purpose of the wiki would be. For example there is nothing stopping anyone (i

Re: (Existing) Perl 6 Wiki: (http://perl.net.au/wiki/Perl_6)

s wiki" or will there be, or is that a different question?) --michael On 24/05/06, Conrad Schneiker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Michael Mathews > > I for one, think a Perl6-users wiki would be extremely useful, I'm > just not sure why a site that distingui

Re: perl 6 hosting?

Um, yes anyone wanna work on a tryperl6 virtual shell? --michael On 23/05/06, Randy W. Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe something along the lines of Randy.

perl 6 hosting?

I realise its still very, very early days, but considering the growing number of people who would enjoy just dabbling a little in perl6, it seems unreasonable to expect that the "average person" would install the many megabytes of beta (alpha?) software required, and keep it all updated with the l

Re: (Existing) Perl 6 Wiki: (http://perl.net.au/wiki/Perl_6)

I for one, think a Perl6-users wiki would be extremely useful, I'm just not sure why a site that distinguishes itself as "a portal for the Australian and New Zealand Perl community" makes the most sense (particularly to anyone trying to find the Perl6-users wiki from outside this mailing list). O

Re: parrot and pugs builds for os x

Hi David, Just downloaded both and ran the installers on my iBook G4 with OS X 10.4.6 (and ghc-6.4.2). So it just worked. I can now pugs -e 'say "hello";' with the rest of them. But I only wish I'd had this three days ago, /before/ I tried to get it installed by hand! Nice one, and many many th

Fwd: Getting to hello world?

Yep, I knew what you meant! I'm in the process of writing this up right now, assuming I can finish compiling Haskell sometime this week (it ain't exactly a fast compile, hrmph). --Michael Mathews On 21/05/06, James Peregrino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You folks took me too

Re: Where can I find a Perl 6 langauge reference?

t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 5/18/06, Michael Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Like Thomas, I'm interested in having a go, in my case I'd like to > install something I can play with. The link is appreciated but what I > was hoping for was a simple set of instructions f

Re: Where can I find a Perl 6 langauge reference?

Like Thomas, I'm interested in having a go, in my case I'd like to install something I can play with. The link is appreciated but what I was hoping for was a simple set of instructions for just installing Perl6 (maybe I missed it--sorry) . Does such a thing exist? Regards, Michael Ma

Re: why not just use C /* ... */ ?

iain truskett said: > Well, personally I was busy with work and uni. Still am, but less > so. My chide was only meant nicely. Of course everyone's experience and insight is a needed contribution to the discussion. > I'd say that no RFC should be frozen until the deadline for all RFCs. > People

Re: why not just use C /* ... */ ?

iain truskett noted: > Anyway: rfc5 claims to be frozen so this is probably a useless > discussion anyway. Hmmm yes, there is that litle detail. So where was all this insightful discussion two weeks ago!!?? Hmmm??!!! Actually I might ask the Librarian for some flexibility on this if anyone c

Re: why not just use C /* ... */ ?

You are certainly not the first nor only person to say this. You should know that this point-of-view is listed in the final RFC, although it is not quite the majority opinion of all the comments I've received. --Michael Johan Vromans said: > > In my opinion, there is no need in Perl for multi-li

Re: why not just use C /* ... */ ?

iain truskett said > Hmm. Just reread RFC5 and it doesn't really come out with a strong > recommendation of anything --- as it says "no clear concensus after [a] > week's discussion". MLCs are a good thing --- they're just tricky to get > right. I'm afraid this is just plain true. As the maintain

Re: why not just use C /* ... */ ?

Johan Vromans said > mm> Nesting is a problem you don't really want to solve, in my opinion. The > mm> world gets real weird, real fast when you can nest and/or overlap comments. > mm> Not worth the trouble. > > If the prime argument for mlc is commenting out large blocks of code > then you'd bett

Re: why not just use C /* ... */ ?

Tom Christiansen said: > D.N.>I mean, really, why not? > > Because we already have comments. Yes, but they are ever so slightly burdensome to use for very large blocks of text. We really are talking Oranges and Tangerines here anyway (at least) since one seems like it is meant to comment A Line w

Re: RFC 58 (v1) C changes.

Bart Lateur said: > So what are these really good for? To get rid of the line terminator, or > "Record Separator", when reading from a file. That is what they are for, > that is what we should facilitate. Not the chop()ping or chomp()ing of > just any string. > > So, let's keep in tune with the R

Re: RFC 58 (v1) C changes.

Ted Ashton said: > Thus it was written in the epistle of Uri Guttman, > > > > how do you tell the above two apart? by array do you mean only an array > > variable? then you can't chomp a list of scalar values or multiple > > arrays, etc. > > > > this needs to be clarified. > > Quite true. The two