David Storrs wrote:
Folks, give us your address (or a PO box, or something), where we can
send checks. The checks won't be tax deductible, but are we really
doing this for the tax deduction?
Sorry for the delay in replying. It isn't lack of appreciation; it's lack of
tuits (I was a little busy g
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 09:19:36AM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> To what extent should the (presumably library-side) ability to parse a
> given markup language influence Perl 6's core language design? (which
> is what this list is nominally about.) I think this ought to
> approximate to "none at all
> > Any input or comments welcome, though you may feel free to email me
> > off-list if it's more appropriate. ;o]
>
> Well, this is a comment, but it's slightly off topic. I would usually
> mail off list (I don't mean to score points or irritate people), but
> it fits part of my view of your subj
Dan --
Dan++
(Dan -- this is going to look familiar to you from prior IRC conversions
IIRC, but
I thought it could stand repeating in public).
A good set of tree/graph primitives/utilities would be a wonderful
addition IMO.
And since XML is so common, I'd like to see it treated as a quotelike
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 08:32:39AM -0800, Paul wrote:
> Any input or comments welcome, though you may feel free to email me
> off-list if it's more appropriate. ;o]
Well, this is a comment, but it's slightly off topic. I would usually mail
off list (I don't mean to score points or irritate people
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
OK, I buy that, I think. But does that mean that fixing edge cases in
your arguments doesn't work at all, i.e. you can't even do this?
sub foo(?$x) {
$x //= 1; # if they passed an undef, init it to 1
...
}
That's right. It's an error. You need:
On Tuesday, March 25, 2003, at 06:17 PM, Damian Conway wrote:
Likewise, I read
sub foo($x //= 1) {...}
as saying the value stored in $x is a constant, but if the caller
passed an undefined value (or didn't pass anything at all), we're
going to instead pretend they passed us a (still-constant)
Robin Berjon wrote:
Including...
The data binding folks have tried to address the problem using XML
Schema, and the result is, hmmm, "unpleasant" to use something polite.
The SOAP and WSDL people have been at it, and I won't even describe
the result because I couldn't possibly be polite about
Andy Wardley wrote:
>
> For example, it might be possible to do something like this:
>
> use Perl6::XML;
>
>
> blah blah
>
>
> use Perl6;
>
> print $thingy.blah;
We already have the ability to embed foreign languages (XML, HTML,
whatever) using here docs:
$myml = MyXml
At 8:32 AM -0800 3/26/03, Paul wrote:
I wonder at times, however, if a simple vote of yea or nay might
actually count for something here.
Plain yes or no? Not generally, no, unless someone's actually looking
for a count or vote.
Yes or no with explanation, especially when it's about things in the
Kurt Starsinic wrote:
On Mar 26, Robin Berjon wrote:
DAGs wouldn't enough though, most XML tree representations aren't really
trees, they're very cyclic.
Pardon me? Could you please provide an example?
XML per se, using an impoverished Information Set (no IDs) can be considered to
be a tree,
Stéphane Payrard wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:40:56PM +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
Efficient annotation and traversal would go a long way, but almost all
useful XML representations have loops unfortunately.
By loop you mean attributes declared by DTD as IDREFs and pointing to
element having the
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:40:56PM +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >At 4:47 PM +0100 3/26/03, Robin Berjon wrote:
> >>Fast and efficient graphs of all sorts would be very useful. A way to
> >>define a complex graph of interlinked arbitrary objects while being
> >>reasonable on
Andy Wardley wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
I just have yet to see someone point at one place
where Perl 5 hinders XML processing in such a way that Perl 6 could help.
(...)
So instead of writing Perl programs to parse and manipulate XML, it
should be possible to modify Perl itself so that it parses
Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi all.
>
> I note that quite often I find myself wanting to express agreement or
> disagreement with some point made on the list, but without anything of
> value to add other than a vote on the matter. When this happens I
> usually ~try~ to bite my metaphorical
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 08:32:39AM -0800, Paul wrote:
> I was just wondering if the occasional "me, too" was appropriate if I
> feel strongly about something, but have nothing to actually *add* that
> hasn't already been said. I really hate to spam a productive list.
>
> Any input or comments wel
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:47 PM +0100 3/26/03, Robin Berjon wrote:
Fast and efficient graphs of all sorts would be very useful. A way to
define a complex graph of interlinked arbitrary objects while being
reasonable on memory and good with GC would be a definitive big win,
especially if it can be
Hi all.
I note that quite often I find myself wanting to express agreement or
disagreement with some point made on the list, but without anything of
value to add other than a vote on the matter. When this happens I
usually ~try~ to bite my metaphorical tongue and just file the
information away wh
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
Ask the people that use them?
Didn't there used to be a stdlib mailing list for discussing this
stuff?
Yes, and it had even started well by trimming a long list of suggestions one by
one (I think Nat was in ch
At 4:47 PM +0100 3/26/03, Robin Berjon wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think that the issue here isn't so much good perl support for XML
as it is good support for attributed DAGs, something which would be
of general good use for perl, since the ASTs the parser feeds to
the compiler will ultimately
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
> > So I guess, at the language level I'm asking if there's a process in
> > place to identify these essential libs and to move forward on them?
>
> Ask the people that use them?
Didn't there used to be a stdlib mailing list for discus
On Mar 26, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >I think that the issue here isn't so much good perl support for XML as
> >it is good support for attributed DAGs, something which would be of
> >general good use for perl, since the ASTs the parser feeds to the
> >compiler will ultimately b
Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To answer a question you asked on an earlier thread, this is one of the
ways that Perl makes doing XML difficult.
Q: "What's the right CPAN lib to pull for parsing/rewriting XML?"
A: Look, we've got a plethora of XML libs, all indi
Dan Sugalski wrote:
I think that the issue here isn't so much good perl support for XML as
it is good support for attributed DAGs, something which would be of
general good use for perl, since the ASTs the parser feeds to the
compiler will ultimately be DAGs of a sort.
So, rather than jumping on
--- Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example, it might be possible to do something like this:
>
> use Perl6::XML;
>
>
> blah blah
>
>
> use Perl6;
>
> print $thingy.blah;
>
Every once in a while, I look at what I'm sending to the list, and I
think "Am
--- Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you looked at the replacements such as XML::XPathScript or
> XML::STX? Or others implemented in other languages that could be
> ported? For XML <=> P6
> translations, are you aware of projects like XBind?
>
> There are a lot of wheels out there
I think that the issue here isn't so much good perl support for XML
as it is good support for attributed DAGs, something which would be
of general good use for perl, since the ASTs the parser feeds to the
compiler will ultimately be DAGs of a sort.
So, rather than jumping on the "XML [insert ve
Andy Wardley wrote:
>
> If my understanding of the design of Perl 6 is correct, the lexer, parser
> and any other related components will be highly configurable and/or
> replaceable. The goal is to provide support for "little languages" by
> separating Perl the language from perl the interpreter
Matthijs van Duin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Apologies for nitpicking, but you misspelled my name as "Mattijs" 4
> times in the summary. The right spelling is "Matthijs" :-)
Argh! Kill me now. Please. Damn, damn and double damn. I say, Simon
old chap, you couldn't fix that on the perl.com sit
Robin Berjon wrote:
> I just have yet to see someone point at one place
> where Perl 5 hinders XML processing in such a way that Perl 6 could help.
If my understanding of the design of Perl 6 is correct, the lexer, parser
and any other related components will be highly configurable and/or
repla
Michael Lazzaro sent the following bits through the ether:
> My own musing was not something that would accept bad XML, but
> something more geared as a P6-based replacement for the steaming
> hunk of crap known as XSL ... For example, one of the Very First
> Things I'll be doing with Perl6 is, of
Michael Lazzaro writes:
> On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 08:30 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
>
> > We don't have a word for "START" right now. It's somewhat equivalent
> > to
> >
> > state $foo //= 0
> >
> > unless $foo gets undefined, I suppose.
>
> Assuming we have a static-like scope called
Apologies for nitpicking, but you misspelled my name as "Mattijs" 4 times
in the summary. The right spelling is "Matthijs" :-)
--
Matthijs van Duin -- May the Forth be with you!
Michael Lazzaro wrote:
My own musing was not something that would accept bad XML, but something
more geared as a P6-based replacement for the steaming hunk of crap
known as XSL. An XML-based derivative that performs XML
transformations, allowing/using embedded P6 regexs, closures, etc., and
ab
Andy Wardley wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
But as someone that also had to parse other people's random
formats before we had XML, I would like to stress strongly the fact that
the current situation is *much* better than it was.
True, but you're also missing the point that XML is a festering pile
of
Christian Renz wrote:
of crap known as XSL. An XML-based derivative that performs XML
transformations, allowing/using embedded P6 regexs, closures, etc.,
and able to more easily translate XML <==> P6 data.
I'm still quite XML-phobic, but I see the need for strong XML support
in Perl 6. However,
Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If it is creating a /toolset/ to make recuperating data from a
quasi-XML (aka
tag soup) then it is an interesting area of research. I can think of
two approaches:
- have a parametrisable XML grammar. By default it would really
p
To what extent should the (presumably library-side) ability to parse a
given markup language influence Perl 6's core language design? (which
is what this list is nominally about.) I think this ought to
approximate to "none at all".
--
I'd rather have ham in my sandwich than cheese, but complaini
Robin Berjon wrote:
> But as someone that also had to parse other people's random
> formats before we had XML, I would like to stress strongly the fact that
> the current situation is *much* better than it was.
True, but you're also missing the point that XML is a festering pile
of steaming cam
39 matches
Mail list logo
