--- Spider Boardman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At some point in history, Paul Hodges wrote (in part):
> ph> So a null byte is still Boolean true. Ugh, yarf, ack, etc.
>
> No. And it never has been (at least in my world view).
A valid point, though I reply:
my $x = "\0";
print "true" i
On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 21:45, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Perhaps not as happy as you think:
>
> my $foo = '0';
> my String $bar = '0';
> if $foo { say 'foo true' }
> if $bar { say 'bar true' }
>
> Would print 'bar true', but not 'foo true'.
Frankly, I love it. Since I plan
At some point in history, Paul Hodges wrote (in part):
ph> So a null byte is still Boolean true. Ugh, yarf, ack, etc.
No. And it never has been (at least in my world view). However, asking
that question explains some things. See below for more.
ph> But as long as I know -- easy enough to che
Juerd writes:
> StÃphane Payrard skribis 2004-06-25 16:15 (-0400):
> > It is unpossible to stack loop modifiers without adding
> > conventions denoting the iterators.
>
> Is it really? I've always thought this would be useful enough:
>
> say .{foo} for @$_ for @foo;
>
> Although that can pro
Paul Hodges wrote:
So a null byte is still Boolean true.
But just tell me thisam I the only guy who thinks this *feels*
wierd? Understanding the reason doesn't make it any more ~comfortable~.
I think you are. Perl considers null to be data--it's that simple.
Remember, while Perl can work with
Stéphane Payrard skribis 2004-06-25 16:15 (-0400):
> It is unpossible to stack loop modifiers without adding
> conventions denoting the iterators.
Is it really? I've always thought this would be useful enough:
say .{foo} for @$_ for @foo;
Although that can probably just be written as:
s
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 03:38:51PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>Hello,
>
> I have a wish for Perl6. I think it would be nice to have the possibility
> for more than one modifier after a simple statement.
>
> For example:
>
>print $a+$b if $a if $b for 1..3;
>
>
> Gerd P
Please configure your email client correctly.
(I'm surprised that the message was accepted, even)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis 2004-06-25 13:38 (-):
> I have a wish for Perl6. I think it would be nice to have the possibility
> for more than one modifier after a simple statement.
Has been di
Hello,
I have a wish for Perl6. I think it would be nice to have the possibility
for more than one modifier after a simple statement.
For example:
print $a+$b if $a if $b for 1..3;
Gerd Pokorra
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Hodges wrote:
So a null byte is still Boolean true.
Ugh, yarf, ack, etc.
But as long as I know -- easy enough to check explicitly.
But just tell me thisam I the only guy who thinks this *feels*
wierd?
It doesn't feel weird to me, but my previous languages of choice
were fairly high-level (
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 08:23:39PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote:
> --- Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So a null byte is still Boolean true.
> Ugh, yarf, ack, etc.
>
> But as long as I know -- easy enough to check explicitly.
>
> But just tell me thisam I the only guy who thinks this *fe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Hodges wrote:
| --- Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
|>Paul Hodges writes:
|>
|>>So, in P6:
|>>
|>> if 0 { print "0\n"; } # I assume this won't print.
|>> if '0' { print "'0'\n"; } # I assume this won't print.
|>> if ''{
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 12:43:30PM -0700, Scott Bronson wrote:
>
> So, in summary, though "0"==false appears to work, it leads to a number
> of strange boundary conditions and, therefore, bugs. It's hard for new
> programmers to grasp and even old hacks are still sometimes tripped up
> by it. It
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Larry Wall wrote:
| Same in Perl 6. For instance, to call the binary addition operator
| C<< $a + $b >> by its "true name", you'd say C<< infix:+($a,$b) >>.
| When you define an operator, you always use the "true name" form.
I immediately start to feel
Jonadab the Unsightly One skribis 2004-06-24 22:11 (-0400):
> No, what's really special is the ability to return entirely
> different things in string versus numeric context, like the
> magic $! does in Perl5.
That too already works in Perl 5. See dualvar in Scalar::Util.
Perl 6 is very neat, but
15 matches
Mail list logo
