I recently encountered a language, E, which has some very nifty
features for building distributed systems. The current version
of E is built on top of Java, but I wonder:
* whether E's features will (could) be supported in Perl 6
* whether E could be supported by Parrot
Here are some referen
A fellow Perlie (NOT on this list) was ruminating on the idea of
generalizing the "Taint" capability into a first-class part of
the language. Something like allowing variables to log their
provenance, for later examination.
I came up with two possible approaches for this. One would act
a bit like
I have commented before on the face that Perl doesn't have "Power Tools"
(read, idioms) that are well suited for handling XML. Turns out that
Tim Bray agrees.
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/03/16/XML-Prog
-r
--
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; phone: +1 650-873-7841
http://www.cfcl.com/rd
I just finished skimming this write-up, located at
http://paulgraham.com/arcll1.html
I'm not a Lisp enthusiast, by and large, but I think he makes some
interesting observations on language design. Take a look if you're
feeling adventurous...
-r
--
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; phone: +1 650-873-7
At 1:29 AM -0800 12/24/02, Michael G Schwern wrote:
I'm going to take a left turn in replying and say that your approach to the
problem is causing the problem. This is diverging from the question of tree
manipulation, but I don't think that's what you really need.
Well-meant suggestions are alw
I find myself frobbing trees a lot these days: read in some XML,
wander around in tree-land for a while, then output either more XML
or somesuch. And, quite frankly, it's a bit of a pain.
The issue, as I see it, is that Perl has no "power tools" for dealing
with trees. I will admit that I don't
At 10:37 PM -0700 12/10/02, Luke Palmer wrote:
Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
...
We have a I language on our hands, people.
Agreed, but this solution doesn't work well for all cases. For example,
what if I want to iterate throug
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 should have a similar capability, using REs.
-r
--
email: [EMAIL PROTE
At 9:54 AM -0700 10/25/02, Larry Wall wrote:
Suppose you have a system in which all farm animals are classified
into the same category, and distinguished by one letter in their
name. All farm animals begin with, say, "snarfu". So we get: ...
A similar problem exists with street names. Some ho
At 6:10 PM +1000 6/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
>> Rich sez:
>> But make Damian use "es", rather than "egs" for the
>> eigenstate ("is" :-) operator.
s/"is"/"it"/, above (blush). That is, the superposition _could_ be in
any of several states, but the eigenstate tells us what "it"
At 4:54 PM +1000 6/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
>Even if Larry decides against superpositions, there will definitely be some
>kind of non-quantum iterator syntax that supports these kinds of permuted
>sequences.
Vicki sez:
Larry? Oh, Larrry.
Pretty please include quantum superpos
I'd like to be able to use REs to generate lists of strings. For
example, it might be nice to create a loop such as:
for $i (sort(p:p5|[0-9A-F]{2}|)) { # "p" operator for "production"?
and have $i walk from '00' through 'FF'. Or whatever.
I created a specialized macro-preprocessor several
At 5:26 PM -0700 4/13/02, Larry Wall wrote:
>Well, Perl 5 doesn't really support compact arrays of known size, and
>those are the only kind that are easy to think about when it comes to
>vectorization.
Actually, I can think of other possibilities. For instance, aren't
some string operations (e.g
Some while back, I asked the Perk5-porters whether there were any
parts of Perl that could benefit from vector processors (e.g., the
G4 Velocity Engine). The consensus of the respondents ranged from
"probably not" to "I don't want to think about it".
I think that better answers could have been f
At a recent talk, Larry showed a line of code that was something like:
(@a; @b; @c) := (@x; @y; 1,2,3);
I'm curious about the mapping of @c to a list of constants; if I write
@c[0]++;
am I bumping the value of 1? As it happens, this used to be the case
on some old Fortrans that used lit
The ListMom for FWP has asked that this thread be removed from that list.
Please edit your submissions accordingly.
-r
--
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; phone: +1 650-873-7841
http://www.cfcl.com/rdm- my home page, resume, etc.
http://www.cfcl.com/Meta - The FreeBSD Browser, Meta Project, etc.
At 11:24 PM -0500 3/6/02, Uri Guttman wrote:
> qn would be just like qq but not allow any
>direct hash interpolations (%foo or %foo{bar}). you can always get those
>with $() if needed. this solves the common case with a minimal of noise
>and the uncommon case has a simple out of using $(). no
17 matches
Mail list logo
