Paul Fenwick wrote:
[1] Klingon semantics: It is better to die() in the attempt than to
return() in failure. I'll buy a beverage for whomever can help me
translate that back into Klingon in time for OSCON. ;)
The concept of better ... than is difficult to express and not very
warrior-like.
Mark J. Reed schrieb:
I think the simplest and most Klingonlike expression of the sentiment
is simply this: yIQap pagh yIHegh! (Succeed or die!)
But you could say something like: SuvwI' yIDa: yIHegh! bIlujchugh yIcheghQo'!
(Behave as a warrior: die! If you fail, do not return!)
Thanks for
Dan Sugalski wrote:
I object to targetting GCC specifically for two reasons,
though, neither of them VMS related:
1) Targeting a single compiler, no matter whose it is, is a bad idea. We're
writing in a *language*, not for a compiler. Targeting a specific compiler
restricts us even more
David Mitchell wrote:
Roland Giersig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe:
"Perl6 should excell at manipulating *formatted* text."
Quite possibly, although as a previous poster has pointed out,
formatted text != XML.
Yes, but both share a common underlying structure: the
Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 01:24:50PM -0500, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
I'd offer the possiblity that there are two (or perhaps more)
different problems here. One is the current bunch of bytes (string,
executable to be twiddled) Another which the attribute on strings
: Roland Giersig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 19 Oct 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: perl6-internals ?
Number: ?
=head1 ABSTRACT
Right now, Perl performs its magic only upon linear strings of ASCII
and Unicode text. As Ilya Zakharevich has stated in his recent
interview (http://www.perl.com/pub
