At 06:01 PM 12/7/00 +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At 01:20 PM 12/7/00 +, David Mitchell wrote:
> > >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > print $foo[0];
> > > > is
> > > >foo->get_string[UTF_8](ARRAY, 0);
> > > > while
> > > >
At 07:02 PM 12/7/00 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 03:11:33PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > >I'm in favour of the exact opposite: an AV is "just" an SV-alike vtable
> > >with array methods instead of scalar methods and a pointer to some
> > >storage, (probably an array of SVs
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 03:11:33PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >I'm in favour of the exact opposite: an AV is "just" an SV-alike vtable
> >with array methods instead of scalar methods and a pointer to some
> >storage, (probably an array of SVs) and likewise an HV. That would allow
> >(array->leng
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 01:20 PM 12/7/00 +, David Mitchell wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > print $foo[0];
> > > is
> > >foo->get_string[UTF_8](ARRAY, 0);
> > > while
> > >print $foo
> > > is
> > >foo->get_string[UTF_8](SCALAR);
At 01:20 PM 12/7/00 +, David Mitchell wrote:
>Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > print $foo[0];
> > is
> >foo->get_string[UTF_8](ARRAY, 0);
> > while
> >print $foo
> > is
> >foo->get_string[UTF_8](SCALAR);
>
>Just to clarify:
>
>does the get_string method in an AV's
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> print $foo[0];
> is
>foo->get_string[UTF_8](ARRAY, 0);
> while
>print $foo
> is
>foo->get_string[UTF_8](SCALAR);
Just to clarify:
does the get_string method in an AV's vtable do an indexing lookup,
grab the relevant SV pointer, then call
At 12:48 PM 12/6/00 -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > Good for you. This is internals design; perl6-language is over there --->
> > and the "ph33r mY |<" phase is supposed to be over now
> > anyway.
>
>Cool! Thanks alot for the useful feedback. Comments like this are
>certainly beneficial to the goal
Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> Oh boy, it's OO syntax nargery time again. *sigh*.
> > I think it would be cool
>
> Good for you. This is internals design; perl6-language is over there --->
> and the "ph33r mY |<" phase is supposed to be over now
> anyway.
Cool! Thanks alot for the useful feedback. Co
At 07:34 PM 12/6/00 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 10:51:14AM -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > Don't forget we can mix-and-match C/C++ to some degree
>
>for added portability!
>
>--
>If computer science was a science, computer "scientists" would study what
>computer systems do a
At 07:55 PM 12/6/00 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>Oh boy, it's OO syntax nargery time again. *sigh*.
>
>On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 10:51:14AM -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> >@array->length
> >%hash->keys
> >
> > Simply keeping @arrays and %hashes as buckets for SV's wouldn't let you
> > do this.
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 10:51:14AM -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Don't forget we can mix-and-match C/C++ to some degree
for added portability!
--
If computer science was a science, computer "scientists" would study what
computer systems do and draw well-reasoned conclusions from it, instead of
Oh boy, it's OO syntax nargery time again. *sigh*.
On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 10:51:14AM -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>@array->length
>%hash->keys
>
> Simply keeping @arrays and %hashes as buckets for SV's wouldn't let you
> do this.
I don't think that's true. At all.
> An "SV" would really
Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> =head2 Implementation Language
>
> C++ gives us OO and headaches, is wildly non-portable due to a lack of
> decent implementations, and we don't have enough experience of it. C's
> portable and everyone knows it, but it's a swine for doing OO things.
Don't forget we can
13 matches
Mail list logo
