marker is here
problematic.)
If one wants to call a method on a number, surely one may follow the
usual advise and write
1 ._5
1 ._foo
1 .efoo
1 .e_foo
0xFF .dead
?
-- Roger Hale
Vadim Konovalov wrote:
Icelandic: laukur (Incidentally, none of you will ever guess how to
correctly pronounce that.)
Russian: luk (pronounced similar to English "look"). For some reason,
Icelandic translation of onion is much closer to Russian than any other
variants...
The English leek is
~ $sep ~ $^b}] @strings
(yes, I know that's not going to pass lexical analysis) since, as was
pointed out, you get an extra $sep at the front.
yours,
Roger Hale
Just a nit, for the record, with no great perl relevance:
"TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
But what is the first quarter of year 0? 0.25?
Sure (of course if there were a year 0 instead of becoming 1 BCE)
> And the last quarter of year -1? -0.25?
Sure
> That works numerically, but March of a
year
eed a dev server...)
Regards,
Roger Hale
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Thomas Sandlaà wrote:
John Williams wrote:
Good point. Another one is: how does the meta_operator determine the
"identity value" for user-defined operators?
Does it have to? The definition of the identity value---BTW, I like
the term "neutral value" better because identity also is a relation
betw
Robert Spier wrote:
Could that be added as 4th line?
Good ideas, all of them. I've updated the page to add that, and to
switch to bz2.
-R
Following Nicholas Clark:
bzcat svk-mirror-dump.bz2 | svnadmin load --ignore-uuid ~/.svk/parrot
presumably should be
bzcat svk-bootstrap-dump.bz2 | svnadmi
Bob Rogers wrote:
So it sounds like we are all saying the same thing now?
Well, two of us at least (with me coming from the peanut gallery)... Leo
has his own say, and it's his proposal.
regards,
Roger
Bob Rogers wrote:
From: Roger Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 04:23:41 -0400
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> Roger Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>
>>>As @ARGS (or @IN_ARGS, @OUT_ARGS) is bein
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Roger Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
As @ARGS (or @IN_ARGS, @OUT_ARGS) is being stored in the context, and
that context is defacto the continuation, yes - a tail-call would
inherit this information.
But as each tail-call supplies a new @ARGS, h
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Roger Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
sub foo { want.List ?? (1,2,3) :: 1 } # or some such
This information could also be attached to @ARGS. E.g.
@ARGS."return_list"(1)
Would it be possible to attach it to the continuation? Then
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Below inline attached is a scheme for an abstraction layer around
calling conventions.
Comments welcome,
leo
> 2.5) return context
>
> Yesterdays conversation on IRC (yes!) has clearly shown that the
> current calling conventions are lacking information about scalar vs
> li
12 matches
Mail list logo
