Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> (*%a, %b) = (%c,%d);# %a slurps, %b gets nothing
> (%a, *%b) = (%c,%d);# %a = %c, %b gets the rest
>
> I'm sure your imaginations can twiddle the cardinality knob
> appropriate for generalization :-)
>
> -Scott
so if you don't know exactly
* Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/08/2001 10:11]:
>
> Nathan Wiger writes:
> : First off, before I forget to mention it, nice job on Apoc2 Larry! You are
> : the man. I know alot of us on p6l can seem like harsh critics at times, but
> : it's only because we love Perl so much. ;-)
>
> We'll ha
I like the lisp-associative-array alternating keys,values nature
of the perl5 %hash=@array semantics, and the way it can be used to
set defaults in hashref argument lists. The replacement must
provide an equivalent but less hacky replacement.
--
David Nicol 816.235.11
Nathan Wiger writes:
: First off, before I forget to mention it, nice job on Apoc2 Larry! You are
: the man. I know alot of us on p6l can seem like harsh critics at times, but
: it's only because we love Perl so much. ;-)
We'll have to do something about that. :-)
: Anyways, in addition to the
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:35:53PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> Yep... particularly considering something neat like
> keys(%a) = @b;
See my earlier comments on lvalue operators. I *hope* lvalues will be
a lot more flexible in Perl 6. :)
--
Be not anxious about what you have, but about what
Graham Barr wrote:
> And what is wrong with
> @a{@b} = ();
> which I use all the time.
I use it too, because that's the perl5 idiom. But what's "wrong" with
it is that you don't have a set on the LHS, you have some funky hash
slice thing, with both the hash AND the keys being assigned into it
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:35:53PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> Edward Peschko wrote:
> > If
> > %a = @b;
> > does
> > %c = map{ ($_ => undef ) } @a;
>
> Yep... particularly considering something neat like
>
> keys(%a) = @b;
And what is wrong with
@a{@b} = ();
which I use all th
Edward Peschko wrote:
> If
> %a = @b;
> does
> %c = map{ ($_ => undef ) } @a;
Yep... particularly considering something neat like
keys(%a) = @b;
could be defined to do that. Or, even niftier
@%a = @b;
--
John Porter
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:06:47PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>%a = (%b : %c);# flattened like Perl 5
Why not this?
*%a = (%b, %c); # flattened. splat!
This makes sense to me since * is already proposed as the slurping
operator and since the LHS is providing context
> Maybe we need a new flattening operator. I don't think the proposed := by
> itself would do everything we need to do. Maybe we need a way to say
> "flatten these together". I'm going to throw out a new ":" op here:
>
>%a = (%b, %c); # same as %a = %b
>%a = (%b : %c);# fl
On 5/5/01 12:06 AM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Maybe we need a way to say "flatten these together".
> I'm going to throw out a new ":" op here:
[snip]
> Hmmm... I kinda like that... Am I missing anything?
Maybe the fact that Larry's already claimed the colon? :)
-John
> Horrors is right. The default perl5 behaviour is *useful*. I use the
%b=(%a,%c)
> metaphor all of the time.
>
> Why not just keep it simple? And perl5-ish. Two contexts, scalar and list,
> hashes NOT a context of its own.
I agree. But what to do with:
(%a, %b) = (%c, %d);
Surely that shoul
On 5/4/01 11:47 PM, Edward Peschko wrote:
> Horrors is right. The default perl5 behaviour is *useful*. I use the
> %b=(%a,%c)
> metaphor all of the time.
I believe you can get the Perl 5 functionality by throwing a few *
characters in there somewhere...
> Why not just keep it simple?
Based on A
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:23:12PM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> On 5/4/01 11:09 PM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > The real trick is what to do with these:
>
> Note: stabbing wildly here... :)
>
> > %a = (%b, %c);
>
> %a = (stringify(\%b) => \%c); # Perl 5-ish
> %a = (%b.str => %c);
On 5/4/01 11:09 PM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> The real trick is what to do with these:
Note: stabbing wildly here... :)
> %a = (%b, %c);
%a = (stringify(\%b) => \%c); # Perl 5-ish
%a = (%b.str => %c); # Perl 6 equiv.
> %d = (@e, @f);
%d = (stringify(\@e) => \@f); # Perl 5-ish
>>$a = @b;
>>
>>2. Pull a reference to @b (like Perl5's "$a = \@b")
>
> Yep. Scalar context eval of arrays, hashes, and subs produces a reference.
Perfect.
>> Similarly, how about:
>>
>>%c = @d;
>>
>> Does this:
>>
>>1. Create a hash w/ alt
> I'm interested in what happens with interactions:
>
>$a = @b;
>
> Does this:
>
>1. Get the length (doesn't seem to make sense now)
No. length(@b) or @b.length() for that.
>2. Pull a reference to @b (like Perl5's "$a = \@b")
Yep. Scalar context eval of a
First off, before I forget to mention it, nice job on Apoc2 Larry! You are
the man. I know alot of us on p6l can seem like harsh critics at times, but
it's only because we love Perl so much. ;-)
Anyways, in addition to the $file.next stuff, I'm curious about a few
clarifications on the new semant
18 matches
Mail list logo
