Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-09 Thread Damian Conway
Erik Steven Harrison wrote: Just found this hidden in my inbox. I didn't think anyone was paying attention ;-). Oh, we *always* pay attention. We just don't always respond. ;-) What I most like about the Cis syntax is (like methods in OO Perl), it associates a meaningful *name* with each

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-09 Thread Damian Conway
Erik Steven Harrison wrote: But still, what counts as a runtime property, other than true or false, as in the delightful '0 but true'? What other kind of runtime labels can I slap on a value? Here's ten to start with... for but tainted(0) {...} # note that external data is

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-09 Thread Steve Canfield
From: Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] that is not a variable property so it should be a compile time error. I was under the impression that compile time properties, like runtime properties, can be arbitrarily invented and/or assigned. If that is correct, why would my $var is true, meaningless

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-09 Thread Damian Conway
Steve Canfield wrote: I was under the impression that compile time properties, like runtime properties, can be arbitrarily invented and/or assigned. Yes, but not purely lower-case ones. They're reserved for Perl 6 itself. (i.e. only Larry can invent/assign them ;-) If that is correct, why

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-09 Thread Erik Steven Harrison
-- On Sun, 08 Sep 2002 22:24:11 Damian Conway wrote: Think of it as punctuation. As a necessary alternative to the poor overworked colon. Or the poor overworked dot? it all looks the same to me. And I like different things to look different. A fair point. My counterargument is

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-08 Thread Damian Conway
Peter Behroozi wrote: sub hidden (str $name, int $force is aka($override)) {...} Hang on a moment! In your original answer to this question, you used the is named('alias') syntax, but now you are suggesting using the sigil in the syntax. Yes, but for a *different* property. The

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-08 Thread Steve Canfield
Would it be accurate to say that is sets properties of variables, whereas but sets properties of values? If so, what would this output: my $var is true; $var=0; if ($var) {print true} else {print false} I would expect it to output false.

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-08 Thread Trey Harris
In a message dated Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Steve Canfield writes: Would it be accurate to say that is sets properties of variables, whereas but sets properties of values? If so, what would this output: my $var is true; $var=0; if ($var) {print true} else {print false} I would expect it

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-08 Thread Steve Canfield
From: Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Canfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] I would expect it to output false. Why? I believe that, whatever you set $var to, you have marked the variable as constantly true in booleans. Because in my experience variables are not true or false. They reference

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-08 Thread Uri Guttman
SC == Steve Canfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: SC Would it be accurate to say that is sets properties of variables, SC whereas but sets properties of values? If so, what would this output: SC my $var is true; that is not a variable property so it should be a compile time error. SC

RE: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-07 Thread Brent Dax
Erik Steven Harrison: # But still, what counts as a runtime property, other than true or # false, as in the delightful '0 but true'? What other kind of runtime # labels can I slap on a value? These occur to me: $foo=0 but string(zero); $bar='foobar' but num(1); $baz=1

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-07 Thread Erik Steven Harrison
-- On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:31:45 Damian Conway wrote: Erik Steven Harrison wrote: I know that the property syntax is pseudo established, but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the built in properties were building. What about good ol' aliases? sub hidden (str $name, int

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-07 Thread Erik Steven Harrison
reposted because my mailer is evil -- On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:31:45 Damian Conway wrote: Erik Steven Harrison wrote: I know that the property syntax is pseudo established, but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the built in properties were building. What about good ol'

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-07 Thread Erik Steven Harrison
-- On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:26:08 Damian Conway wrote: Erik Steven Harrison wrote: Is it just me or is the 'is' property syntax a little too intuitive? Seems like everywhere I turn, the proposed syntax to solve a problem is to apply a property. That's because most of the problems

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-07 Thread Steve Canfield
Damian Conway wrote: And is the is/but distinction still around? Oh, yes. Could someone please reference where this decision was made. I do not find any information describing the distinction. Steve _ Join the world’s largest

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-07 Thread Me
Damian Conway wrote: And is the is/but distinction still around? Oh, yes. Could someone please reference where this decision was made. I do not find any information describing the distinction. The following May 2001 post was related. Poke around the thread it was in, especially posts

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-05 Thread Damian Conway
Erik Steven Harrison wrote: I know that the property syntax is pseudo established, but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the built in properties were building. What about good ol' aliases? sub hidden (str $name, int $force := $override) {...} I'm not keen on it because it

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-05 Thread Peter Behroozi
On Thu, 2002-09-05 at 04:31, Damian Conway wrote: sub hidden (str $name, int $force is aka($override)) {...} Hang on a moment! In your original answer to this question, you used the is named('alias') syntax, but now you are suggesting using the sigil in the syntax. So, should it really be

RE: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-04 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Peter Behroozi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Has anyone considered a syntax for allowing subroutines to have many different names for the same argument? For example, in CGI.pm, many methods support the -override parameter but can also accept the alias of -force: Yes. See the thread starting at

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-04 Thread Damian Conway
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sub hidden (str $name, int $force, int $override is aka($force)) { ... } Would the following be simpler...? sub hidden (str $name, int $force is aka($override)) { ... } Yeah, that's what I meant. Sorry. I've travelled 14,000 miles and given 93 hours of

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-04 Thread Erik Steven Harrison
Somewhere, in another thread . . . Dr. Claw wrote . . . sub hidden (str $name, int $force is aka($override)) { ... } Yeah, that's what I meant. Is it just me or is the 'is' property syntax a little too intuitive? Seems like everywhere I turn, the proposed syntax to solve a problem is

Re: Argument aliasing for subs

2002-09-04 Thread Erik Steven Harrison
sub hidden (str $name, int $force is aka($override)) { ... } I know that the property syntax is pseudo established, but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the built in properties were building. What about good ol' aliases? sub hidden (str $name, int $force := $override) { .