Rich Morin wrote:
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
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Jim Cromie wrote:
Rich Morin wrote:
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
On 10 Mar 02 at 11:14:26PM, Uri Guttman wrote:
i really think that the printf format spec is so standard and ingrained
that changing it with # for % or requiring \% is not a good idea.
but then again, backwards compatibility is not a rule you must always
obey. i just think in this case it
On 10 Mar 02 at 11:14:26PM, Uri Guttman wrote:
i really think that the printf format spec is so standard and ingrained
that changing it with # for % or requiring \% is not a good idea.
but then again, backwards compatibility is not a rule you must always
obey. i just think in this case it
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:15:30PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
BL == Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BL On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:57:07 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
how often will you need to interpolate a hash?
BL A whole hash: quite rarely. A hash item: a LOT. Don't forget that
a == abigail [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
a On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:15:30PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
good point. $() can still wrap that but then there has to be a balance
between printf strings and double quoters. how about this wacky idea:
make a new type of string where
Uri Guttman:
# i disagree. but we shall see if larry is listening to this thread and
# will back away from hash interpolation or take some of our suggestions
# that make it work without killing format strings. i hate to see a
# special call or wierd syntax for that. my qn (or qf)
# suggestion
Abigail:
# I'd think it would be much better that '%' followed by a word *not*
# followed by a { isn't interpolated. Granted, you cannot do
# interpolation
# of hashes (well, one could always write @{[%hash]}, just
# like in perl5,
# and there's little change of clashing with printf formats.
#
BD == Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BD I think qn counts as weird syntax. I ask again, what's wrong with one
BD of:
BD sprintf(%hash\%s, $string);
BD sprintf(%hash.'%s', $string);
BD sprintf('%s%s', _%hash, $string);
what if you want to use %hash{width} as a field
Uri Guttman:
# BD == Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
#
# BD I think qn counts as weird syntax. I ask again, what's
# wrong with one
# BD of:
#
# BD sprintf(%hash\%s, $string);
#
# BD sprintf(%hash.'%s', $string);
# BD sprintf('%s%s', _%hash, $string);
#
#
Why not replace the escape character '%' with '#'? No new quoting
operators or functions to learn. And introduce a warning if there are
no #'s in the format string.
Eugene
BD == Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BD Uri Guttman:
BD # $prec = %hash{width} ;
BD # sprintf( qf%${prec}s, $string);
BD #
BD # sprintf( \%${prec}s, $string);
BD #
BD # is one of your alternatives. :-/
BD You forgot one.
BD sprintf('%'_%hash{width}_'s', $string);
At 01:39 AM 3/11/02 +0100, Eugene van der Pijll wrote:
Why not replace the escape character '%' with '#'? No new quoting
operators or functions to learn.
Beat me to it.
And introduce a warning if there are
no #'s in the format string.
Maybe if it's a constant, but not if you're doing something
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
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:24:57PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
that is another point. not allowing a complete hash to interpolate. but
what defines that? what if you wanted %s{bar} and that was a format and
not a hash and in a double quoted string? my proposal handles that well
with no major
BC == Bernie Cosell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
cced perl6-language
BC I wonder if the solution is to look at it the other way: that you
BC have to do something to get interpolation to happen. If we look
BC at it from the old adage of making the more common things simpler,
BC at least
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:57:07 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
how often will you need to interpolate a hash?
A whole hash: quite rarely. A hash item: a LOT. Don't forget that
$foo{BAR} will now become %foo{BAR}
--
Bart.
--- Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:57:07 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
how often will you need to interpolate a hash?
A whole hash: quite rarely. A hash item: a LOT. Don't forget that
$foo{BAR} will now become %foo{BAR}
Of course, it could also become %s. Or _
Uri Guttman:
# printf %d hash is $(%foo.string), $bar ;
#
# no ambiguity and no confusion. how often will you need to
# interpolate a
# hash?
As others have pointed out, %foo{BAR} has to work. But I have another
question for you: what's wrong with
sprintf '%d hash is %s', $bar,
BL == Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BL On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:57:07 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
how often will you need to interpolate a hash?
BL A whole hash: quite rarely. A hash item: a LOT. Don't forget that
BL $foo{BAR} will now become %foo{BAR}
good point. $() can still
BD == Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BD Uri Guttman:
BD # printf %d hash is $(%foo.string), $bar ;
BD #
BD # no ambiguity and no confusion. how often will you need to
BD # interpolate a
BD # hash?
BD As others have pointed out, %foo{BAR} has to work. But I have
21 matches
Mail list logo
