Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 09:50 PM 3/26/2001 -0500, James Mastros wrote:
[..]
I'd think /perl/ should complain if your comparison function isn't
idempotent (if warnings on, of course). If nothing else, it's probably an
indicator that you should be using that schwartz thang.
If you figure
James Mastros wrote:
[..]
f("+123,456")=123456
f(f("+123,456))=123456
The functon is not idempotent. Even if you checked f(x)==x (function is the
identity), an input of "123456" would work.
just a comment on this, we are talking about sorting which would generally
mean that the
could you not try a simple test (not guaranteed to be 100% accurate
though),
by copying the first data element and apply it twice and then check to see
that the result of applying it once is the same as applying it twice.
Feels a little too magic to me, and awfully fragile. I'm not
please ignore my previous message. i think that my mind was trapped in an
alternate dimension :)
peter
Peter Buckingham wrote:
James Mastros wrote:
[..]
f("+123,456")=123456
f(f("+123,456))=123456
The functon is not idempotent. Even if you checked f(
Dan Sugalski wrote:
And, unless Larry objects, I feel that all vtable methods should have
the option of going with a 'scalar native' form if the operation if it's
determined at runtime that two scalars are the same type, though this is
optional and bay be skipped for cost reasons. (Doing it
Just a couple of additons.
i can't remember whether anyone mentioned cormen et al:
Introduction to Algorithms,
Cormen, Leiserson Rivest
another bible:
Principles of Concurrent and Distributed Programming,
M. Ben-Ari
also:
Object-Oriented Software
David Grove wrote:
Read-only and carefully censored lists are irrelevant to the goals of
Perl 6's giving voice to the perl community. They lead us right back
where we were before, with a core group free to sit back unchallenged on their
complacency and let Perl go to rot. To accomplish a
Philip Newton wrote:
On 4 Oct 2000, at 14:06, John Porter wrote:
I am of the opinion that any documentation which requires, or at least
would significantly benefit from, the use of something heavy like SGML
is best done OUTSIDE THE CODE. There's no reason you can't have
document files
Try Martin Fowler's UML Distilled, very good and short!
Is it available electronically, or do I need to trot over to Quantum Books
and drop some cash on it? (Man, they love me there...) If it's paper, got
an ISBN?
uhm unfortunately it'll cost you its about $30USD (i fortunately had it
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 04:17 PM 9/28/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
I think, though, that the core interface should be procedural.
I agree. We should not confuse OOD with OOP.
Fair enough, and I was.
I've no experience with UML, though. Got a pointer to a quick overview?
Try Martin
Glenn Linderman wrote:
Nathan, thanks for zeroing in on this paragraph from RFC 23. It raises a
question in my mind about the meaning of the RFC, and whether the paragraph is
even necessary, which could answer your question about implementation.
If a curried subroutine is truly generated
11 matches
Mail list logo
