Re: Re-thinking file test operations

2009-07-16 Thread Paul Hodges
--- On Thu, 7/9/09, Moritz Lenz mor...@faui2k3.org wrote: . . . Somehow the current file test syntax, 'filename' ~~ :e, looks like a not well-though-out translation of Perl 5's syntax, -e 'filename'. Apart from totally feeling wrong to me, Dunno about totally. I'm still trying to get a P6

Re: Logo considerations

2009-03-31 Thread Paul Hodges
--- On Tue, 3/24/09, jason switzer jswit...@gmail.com wrote: Basically, the perl community has largely adopted TIMTOWTDI So how about a Tim the Toady? :) === Hodges' Rule of Thumb: Don't expect reasonable behavior from anything with

Re: Logo considerations

2009-03-24 Thread Paul Hodges
--- On Tue, 3/24/09, John Macdonald j...@perlwolf.com wrote: The graphene logo inspires me to suggest that a carbon ring be used as the logo for Parrot...   A carbon ring also has the advantages that it's regognizable as a very small logo, even as just a favicon.ico, and can be reasonably if

Re: how to write literals of some Perl 6 types?

2008-12-05 Thread Paul Hodges
(full quote below) As Duncan said, the real question is what’s the point of having Bit when we also have both Int and Blob. I think none. I can't find anything in the existing synopses about Blobs. Probably looking in the wrong place, sorry. Blobs can handle arbitrary numbers of bits? If so,

[OT] Re: [svn:perl6-synopsis] r14501 - doc/trunk/design/syn

2008-02-05 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Besides $^_ is just uglier than anything else I've seen today... lol -- I thought of it as a rather cute peeking-wink with a cauliflower ear, but that's probably much more cutesiness than we want to encourage in our language design.

Re: what should be the default extension?

2008-01-07 Thread Paul Hodges
A small tangent that might be relevant -- what's the current convention for, say, putting several related packages in the same file? In p5, I might write a great Foo.pm that loads Foo::Loader.pm and Foo::Parser.pm and Foo::Object.pm; I'd usually drop them into seperate files and have one load

Re: Multiline comments in Perl6

2008-01-03 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Hodges wrote: http://perl6.org/doc/design/syn/S02.html still says: Intra-line comments will not be supported in standard Perl This is wrong, since S02 also defines intra-line comments, under Whitespace and Comments. It calls them

Re: Multiline comments in Perl6

2008-01-02 Thread Paul Hodges
I love this list. I wish I had more of value to contribute. =o] But for those of you who don't want to read a long blather, this is mostly opinion, hopefully sans soapbox. Feel free to skip to the end. asnideWhat's with the sudden influx of people swooping in at the last minute and attacking

Re: Standards bearers (was Re: xml and perl 6)

2007-12-11 Thread Paul Hodges
duh. I'll learn to finish reading all the posts before adding my own *someday*. --- Darren Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:23 AM +0300 12/11/07, Richard Hainsworth wrote: Darren Duncan wrote: At 9:04 AM +0300 12/10/07, Richard Hainsworth wrote: Equally, Something to replace CGI or DBI

Re: Standards bearers (was Re: xml and perl 6)

2007-12-11 Thread Paul Hodges
It also helps that you consistently make incisive observations and contributions to conversations, even if they are a little tart sometimes. :) But on this general note, is there any current organization or location where small problems are being parcelled out? I'd love to help, but my time is

[OT][SPAM] Re: Pair notation for number radix

2007-12-06 Thread Paul Hodges
This is another great example of why I love this list. :o] I live in GA, so far out in the boonies that I can't get cable or broadband at *all* except for by satellite. I've stopped trying to explain what I do, because I start saying things like this, and they glaze and visibly regret it,

Re: xml and perl 6

2007-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Alex Kapranoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Â ×òâ, 29/11/2007 â 07:18 +0100, James Fuller ïèøåò: On Nov 28, 2007 8:46 PM, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 28 November 2007 10:59:30 James Fuller wrote: I do not nec. agree with 'a particular grammer is not' part of the

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 07:41:54PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote: : while length($ruler) $len; # till there's enough There is no length function anymore. duh. I knew that. Still thinking in v5. Thanks, Larry

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-18 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Adriano Ferreira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [[snips here and at end]] . . . I have one suggestion: you might want to mention the roundrobin function in the article on the zip function since the two are very closely related. Thanks, Joe and Alberto. Even though the roundrobin is very

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-18 Thread Paul Hodges
length($ruler) $len; # till there's enough return $ruler; # and returns the string } my $r = page_ruler(25); # 0123456789012345678901234 Again, PLEASE double-check my probably goofy syntax. Paul --- Adriano Ferreira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/18/07, Paul Hodges

Re: Web Module (Was: Perl6 new features)

2007-06-25 Thread Paul Hodges
How about a Bundle::Common? Streamline both the core and the inclusion of the most commonly used modules? The core does include the CPAN module, right? Personally, I *prefer* grabbing what I need piecemeal, but I understand making it easy if possible --- Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Re: Is Perl 6 too late? (an aside)

2007-06-14 Thread Paul Hodges
It's a valid aside to note that, while people know what singular and plural are, few people use or even refer much to the Greek use of a special intermediary (the dual) when there were exectly two of something...but the basic mindest of dichotomy is a fundament of the language. (c.f. the men/de

Re: S04 - forbidden coding-style

2006-07-24 Thread Paul Hodges
I know, shoot me -- but just so we've discussed it and put it to bed, maybe :if or _if or fi? shudders --- Aaron Crane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Larry Wall writes: Maybe we should just make statement modifiers uppercase and burn out everyone's eye sockets. :) I like statement

Re: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6

2006-06-03 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Ashley Winters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/2/06, Paul Hodges [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: my @answer = map { async { _() } } @jobs; That still seems too explicit. I thought we had hyperoperators to implictly parallelize for us: my @answer = @jobs.»(); Which would run them

Re: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6

2006-06-03 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 03:51:45PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote: : { no threads; :print @_.»(); : } It seems a bit odd to use a construct for its syntactic sugar value but take away its semantics... If you just need ordering

RE: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6

2006-06-02 Thread Paul Hodges
--- John Drago [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean is parallel as a synonym for is async? I think is parallel denotes something as usable by multiple threads simultaneously, in parallel. is serial would denote that only one thread can use the $thing at a time, exclusively. Are you saying

RE: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6

2006-06-02 Thread Paul Hodges
--- John Drago [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . class QueueRunner { our sub process_queue(Code @jobs_in) { my @ans is serial; @ans.push map { async { _() } } @jobs_in; @ans; } } my @answer = QueueRunner.process_job_queue( @jobs ); Actually I think you did

Re: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6

2006-05-31 Thread Paul Hodges
How about one of these? == class Baz { has $.a is restricted; has $.b is controlled; has $.c is unique; has $.d is shared; has $.e is queued; has $.f is token; ... } --- John Drago [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I asked this via the Google Groups interface

RE: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6

2006-05-31 Thread Paul Hodges
--- John Drago [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: James Mastros wrote: I don't like the name synchronized -- it implies that multiple things are happening at the same time, as in synchronized swiming, which is exactly the opposite of what should be implied. Serialized would be a nice name, except

Re: packages vs. classes

2006-05-26 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Stevan Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/23/06, Sam Vilain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People can diverge completely with completely incompatible metaclasses that don't .do those roles, the only side effect of which being that people who write code for the standard Perl 6 metamodel

Re: [svn:perl6-synopsis] r7784 - doc/trunk/design/syn

2006-02-23 Thread Paul Hodges
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . -Such an eigenmethod is delegated to C.meta just as method like . . . +Such an Imetaclass method is always delegated to C.meta just as changing eigenmethod to Imetaclass method should also change an to a: +Such a Imetaclass method is always delegated to

Re: File.seek() interface

2005-07-07 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Arguably, we could probably admit $fh.pos = 10`bytes for the case of seeking from the begining. But I'd kind of like $fh.pos = 10 to be considered an error. It seems a logical extension also to say $fh.pos += 10`bytes as

Re: junctions as indicies

2005-04-18 Thread Paul Hodges
--- David Christensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm looking in S09, and reading about junctions. It seems to me that if we have a junction $j which we use to index into an array or a hash, it should DWIM and return a junction of the corresponding values. @ar=[1..10]; %hash=(a=1,b=4,c=7);

Re: should we change [^a-z] to -[a..z] instead of -[a-z]?

2005-04-17 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:28:31AM -0500, Rod Adams wrote: : David Wheeler wrote: : : But the first person to write [a...] gets what's comin' to 'em. : : Is that nothing (since '.' lt 'a'), or everything after 'a'? Might as well make it

Re: should we change [^a-z] to -[a..z] instead of -[a-z]?

2005-04-17 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . -[a..z] should be allowed/encouraged/required. It greatly improves the readability in my estimation. The only problem with requiring .. is that people *will* write [a-z] out of habit, and we would probably have to outlaw the - form for

Re: Classes with several, mostly unused, attributes

2004-12-15 Thread Paul Hodges
--- David Storrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . . Obviously, however @Larry decide it should be, is the way it'll be and nothing I can say will change that. Au contraire -- that's what this list is for. State your opinion, man! :) That said: this would suck. Badly. We should not be

Re: Time to change the (perl 6) guard! [OT]

2004-07-07 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Austin Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . . Of the qualities you listed for Pumpking: Look, I already told you! I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to! I have people skills! I am good at dealing with people! Can't you understand that? What the hell is

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-26 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hodges) writes: Do note that I realize I can check it. It's just that for no reason I can quite define, my C background wants a null byte to be FALSE without any special chicanery on my part when checking. I can live

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-26 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Jonadab the Unsightly One [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Hodges wrote: Do note that I realize I can check it. It's just that for no reason I can quite define, my C background wants a null byte to be FALSE without any special chicanery on my part when checking. I can live

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-26 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Hodges wrote: --- Spider Boardman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You need ord() for character/grapheme/byte/whatever testing that's equivalent to what C does. Since C doesn't really have strings, and Perl does, this is just one of those

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-25 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Spider Boardman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At some point in history, Paul Hodges wrote (in part): ph So a null byte is still Boolean true. Ugh, yarf, ack, etc. No. And it never has been (at least in my world view). A valid point, though I reply: my $x = \0; print true if $x

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-24 Thread Paul Hodges
is, will this: if \0 { print null\n; } # Is this going to print, or not? And if the answer is because I've somehow botched my syntax, please correct it and answer the question I obviously *meant* to ask as well? =o) Paul --- Hodges, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Every now and then I have

Re: definitions of truth

2004-06-24 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Hodges writes: So, in P6: if 0 { print 0\n; } # I assume this won't print. if '0' { print '0'\n; } # I assume this won't print. if ''{ print ''\n;} # I assume this won't print. if undef { print undef\n; } # I

Re: enums and bitenums

2003-12-13 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 03:10:30PM -0800, Paul Hodges wrote: : Ok, wait a sec. Does that mean different references to the same : critter can have differing sets of aspects? : : my Dog $Spot; : my $doggie = Dog.new(); : my $meandog

Re: enums and bitenums

2003-12-13 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 07:16:21AM -0800, Paul Hodges wrote: : $Spot = $visitor.nephew ?? $nicedog :: $meandog; : : Which brings up a small side note: that's a successfully applied : boolean context for $visitor.nephew, right? Yes

Re: roles (Was: enums and bitenums)

2003-12-11 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Jonathan Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Incidently, I think I've caught on to _one_ of the concepts in the upcoming object-orientation proposal: linguistically, there's a triad of basic verbs - namely be, do, and have. If I'm following things properly, one could think of an object's

Re: Properties -- distributive, predeclared, post-applied....??

2003-12-04 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hodges, Paul writes: How about use Baz; # assume object type my property foo; my @bar of Baz is false but foo; # maybe not what you meant? Definitely not what you meant. Fortunately, the compiler will teach you a thing or two about

Re: OP [was: Re: Properties] [OT]

2003-12-03 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hodges) writes: I am not seeing unicode. Don't worry because, and I honestly don't mean this disparagingly - by the time Perl 6 is ready for prime-time, you will. Larry got this one right. lol -- I think you're right

Re: OP [was: Re: Properties]

2003-12-02 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Michael Lazzaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Monday, December 1, 2003, at 01:05 PM, Hodges, Paul wrote: Didn't know is would do that. Good to know! And in my meager defense, I did reference MikeL's operator synopsis as of 3/25/03, which said ^[op] might be a synonym for or (Sorry,

Re: OP [was: Re: Properties] [OT]

2003-12-02 Thread Paul Hodges
And as far as I know, and are exactly equivalent to æ?? and æ?? in all cases. lol I get the idea, but I foresee these unicode bits as becoming an occasional sharp spot in my metaphorical seat of consciousness. :) I am not seeing unicode. __ Do you

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 08:08:05PM -0800, Paul Hodges wrote: : --- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : ... in fact, we may be limiting the creation of properties : to predeclared names, so that even : : return 0 but ture; : : can

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Larry Wall writes: : if $x.foo { print $x has property foo } : $x.bar = 1; # Or $x = $x but bar Or maybe the .bar notation is only for rvalues, and to create a property you have to say: $x but= bar; I think that would be an

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 09:13:32AM -0800, Paul Hodges wrote: : --- Smylers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : Larry Wall writes: : : : if $x.foo { print $x has property foo } : : $x.bar = 1; # Or $x = $x but bar : : Or maybe the .bar

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 08:50:57AM -0800, Paul Hodges wrote: : hmm... lexical propertiesI've read the rest of the message, : and I see how this could be a problem. Just to be clear on it, : what exactly would it mean for a property or trait

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Paul Hodges [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: print foo is $x; With deeply sincere apologies, that should have been print foo if $x; __ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
: but it confuses me. Does that mean you're leaning more toward : allowing undeclared properties, or just that you're still trying : to give both sides of the argument thorough consideration? I'm not doing either of those things... :-) Yayy! :) : Just for my vote, I want to be able to

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
: And exportation??? Exportation is just aliasing some name inside a scope to somewhere outside the scope. Importatation is the same operation from the viewpoint of the importing scope. I just wasn't thinking clearly when you said it the first time. Perl 5 didn't allow exportation of

Re: Properties

2003-11-29 Thread Paul Hodges
With apologies, I'm already seeing blunders. *sigh* my Baz @ray = ( Baz.new() ); No reason to type that. Should be my @ray = ( Baz.new() ); __ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/

Re: Properties

2003-11-27 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... in fact, we may be limiting the creation of properties to predeclared names, so that even return 0 but ture; can be caught at compile time. Excellent, so long as we can define new properties explicitly. At the moment, I draw a complete

Re: Autovivification (was Re: E6: assume nothing)

2003-09-26 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 11:18:12AM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote: : By the way, I trust this will be addressed (if it hasn't been : already): : : perl5 -le 'print gah! if exists $a{b}{c}; print phooey! : if exists $a{b}' : : perlfunc says: : :