On 5/4/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To get the other behavior, you have to say one of:
>
> given "hello" {
> when /hello/ {
> say "One";
> when /hello/ { say "Two"; continue; }
> when /hello/ { say "Three"; continue; }
> co
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 11:00:31PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: What should the output of this be:
:
: given "hello" {
: when /hello/ {
: say "One";
: when /hello/ { say "Two"; }
: when /hello/ { say "Three"; }
: continue;
: }
:
What should the output of this be:
given "hello" {
when /hello/ {
say "One";
when /hello/ { say "Two"; }
when /hello/ { say "Three"; }
continue;
}
say "Four";
}
I think:
One
Two
Three
Four
But pugs t
Hi all,
So, there I was setting up an OpenFoundry account for another project,
http://utilvserver.openfoundry.org/, when they wanted to get commit e-mails
with diffs. So I logged a feature request at http://xrl.us/fy3j, but that
didn't give me commit e-mails straight away, so instead I decided to
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 01:37:43PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
> On May 3, 2005, at 12:32 PM, Nathan Gray wrote:
> >Can you put the definitions of each attribute in one of the README
> >files?
>
> I will put these common ones in there yes. However, the nice aspect of
> using the TODO "reason" at
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 07:29:35AM -0700, Mark A. Biggar wrote:
> Except that xor or ^^ is only a binary operation, there is no
> "xor(p1,p2,...)", only "p1 xor p2 xor ..." which can really only be
> understood if you add () to disambiguate the order that the binary ops
> are performed. Fortunat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see here another case of a common erroneous approach to
problem-solving. People are trying to enumerate definitions to impose
on something, rather than starting with the thing at hand and
exhausting any clues it may provide before moving on. This can lead to
serious an
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Matt Fowles wrote:
Perl 6 Summary for 2004-04-26 through 2005-05-03
^^
^^
Wow!
Michele
--
Why should I read the fucking manual? I know how to fuck!
In fact the problem is that the fucking manual only gives you
theoretica
I see here another case of a common erroneous approach to
problem-solving. People are trying to enumerate definitions to impose
on something, rather than starting with the thing at hand and
exhausting any clues it may provide before moving on. This can lead to
serious and, in hindsight, embarras
