Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In Perl 5:
>
> my @a = (1,2,3);
> my @b = @a[0..3];
> print scalar(@b); # 4
>
> But in Perl 6:
>
> my @a = (1,2,3,4);
> my @b = @a[1...]; # elements from 1 onward
> say [EMAIL PROTECTED]; # should probably be 3, but with Perl
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Juerd wrote:
Seriously, is there some reason that we would not provide a
"Language::Russian" and "Language::Nihongo"? Given Perl 6, it would even
[snip]
Because providing it leads to its use, and when it gets used, knowing
English is no longer enough.
I have some code that uses
I've taken a shot at starting a Synopsis 27 as well:
http://svn.openfoundry.org/pugs/docs/S27draft.pod
Cheers, Brian
wolverian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 12:18:45PM -0400, MrJoltCola wrote:
>> I cannot say how much Perl6 will expose to the high level language.
>
> That is what I'm wondering about. I'm sorry I was so unclear.
>
>> Can you tell me what your idea of a "scope" is? I'm thin
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 03:53:32PM -0400, Mark Reed wrote:
(B: I think that, in general, at the level of Perl code, 1
$B!H(Bcharacter$B!I(B should be
(B: one code point, and any higher-level support for combining and splitting
(B: should be outside the core, in Unicode::Whatever.
(B
(BI t
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:36:02AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
: wolverian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 12:18:45PM -0400, MrJoltCola wrote:
: >> I cannot say how much Perl6 will expose to the high level language.
: >
: > That is what I'm wondering about. I'm sorry I was
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:08:43AM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
: I was thinking about this today, actually, because my CS textbook was
: talking about multidimensional arrays. If we make an infinite index
: mean "slice until you can slice no more", then we can possibly have a
: C> which
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:08:04PM -0700, gcomnz wrote:
: I read "followed by 0 or more combining characters" to mean that it is
: smart enough to combine the vowels in Arabic and other syllabic
: alphabets that use special conjuncts. However I'm also not exactly
: sure if that's even reasonably po
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 03:42:25PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> I don't think you can say (as Larry has) that you want to be able to
> fully re-define the language from within itself and still impose the
> constraint that "it can't confuse people who don't know anything about
> my module."
>
> Yo
Thomas Yandell skribis 2005-04-12 13:13 (+0100):
> According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
> and 600 million people who have English as a second language. Should the
> remaining ~5.5 billion humans be exluded from writing perl code just so that
> we English sp
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 02:38:01PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> (Still, having them around does help many people, and that's why I think
> perldocs should perhaps come in several languages (as a different
> project, so translation delays don't delay Perl releases)).
"Should" ?
Who is going to pay for a
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 13:58 (+0100):
> > (Still, having them around does help many people, and that's why I think
> > perldocs should perhaps come in several languages (as a different
> > project, so translation delays don't delay Perl releases)).
> "Should" ?
Yes, should. That's ideol
On Tuesday 12 April 2005 07:42 am, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 03:42:25PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> > > I'm not even sure I like the *possibility* of using non-ascii letters
> > > in identifiers, even.
> >
> > I think we already have Latin-1 in identifiers...
>
> more's the
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 02:38:01PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Thomas Yandell skribis 2005-04-12 13:13 (+0100):
> > According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
> > and 600 million people who have English as a second language. Should the
> > remaining ~5.5 billion humans
> > > I'm not even sure I like the *possibility* of using non-ascii letters
> in
> > > identifiers, even.
> > I think we already have Latin-1 in identifiers...
>
> more's the pity.
According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English speakers
and 600 million people who have Engli
But your numbers are utterly useless, as they are counts of humans, not
> programmers. I think that the number of programmers who don't understand
> English is very small. They know English because historically, the
> programmer's world has been English.
My point was that English speakers are in
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:09:10PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 13:58 (+0100):
> > > (Still, having them around does help many people, and that's why I think
> > > perldocs should perhaps come in several languages (as a different
> > > project, so translation delays don't
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 14:34 (+0100):
> > Yes, should. That's ideology, though.
> I read "should" as a danger word. It's often person A describing a desirable
> feature and intimating that unspecified other people B-Z ought to be
> implementing it.
Please note that I try to not think ab
Juerd skribis 2005-04-12 15:46 (+0200):
> Please note that I try to not think about who's going to implement it at
> all. That makes being creative and coming up with good ideas much, much
> easier.
And to be honest, it makes coming up with bad ideas much easier than
that even :)
Juerd
--
http:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:46:03PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Yes, if it is done, people are indeed involved, but if we all agree that
> something must happen, that's not terribly relevant. And before we can
That's another dangerous word.
> If stuff is only happening because people c
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:48:02PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Juerd skribis 2005-04-12 15:46 (+0200):
> > Please note that I try to not think about who's going to implement it at
> > all. That makes being creative and coming up with good ideas much, much
> > easier.
>
> And to be honest, it makes comin
Nicholas Clark skribis 2005-04-12 14:52 (+0100):
> > Yes, if it is done, people are indeed involved, but if we all agree that
> > something must happen, that's not terribly relevant. And before we can
>
> That's another dangerous word.
Not in combination with "if we all agree" :)
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 07:42, David Cantrell wrote:
> > You might argue that Language::Dutch should never ship with the core...
> > that's a valid opinion, but SOMEONE is going to write it. It'd be a kind
> > of strange form of censorship for CPAN not to accept it. After all,
> > there's more than
We blitzed a discussion on #perl 3 minutes ago, reaching the
conclusion that negated subscripts are cool.
So i was thinking:
subscripts are objects.
They are sets, really.
You can perform set operations on them:
[!-2]
is the subscript for everything but the second to last element.
B
Following the instructions in README.Win32 (which has been successful
for me in the past), no longer works successfully. First, I cannot run
Configure.pl successfully; it complains about --icudatadir not being
defined (again not one of the --icu* options mentioned in README.Win32
AND not necessary
Yuval Kogman wrote:
You can perform set operations on them:
[!-2]
Hmm, that would produce a boolean index.
is the subscript for everything but the second to last element.
By using a context enforcer (subscript [] ?, maybe since lists are
lazyy they can just be subscripts when used that way?) you
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:36:02AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> : wolverian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> :
> : > On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 12:18:45PM -0400, MrJoltCola wrote:
> : >> I cannot say how much Perl6 will expose to the high level language.
> : >
>
Hi Mark,
I was able to compile parrot yesterday night. I compiled icu and
copied the contents of the directory icu/include (two directories)
manually to parrot/src. After that the compiler didn't complain
anymore and I got a working parrot.exe. The --icudatadir I pointed to
the out directory in my
Solinski, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Following the instructions in README.Win32 (which has been successful
> for me in the past), no longer works successfully. First, I cannot run
> Configure.pl successfully; it complains about --icudatadir not being
> defined (again not one of the --icu* o
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:08:43AM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> : @foo[1,3; *; 7]
> :
> : Which I rather like.
>
> Me too. Unless my memory is failing me, I believe that's what S09
> already specifies.
It does include a C> (d'oh, should've
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2005-04-12
Whoa! Deja vu! Where'd Matt go?
Don't worry, Matt's still writing summaries. As you may have noticed,
Matt's been writing summaries every two weeks. And now so am I. Because
we love you, we've decided to arrange things so I write su
I am delighted to report that the first major milestone of Pugs, version
6.2.0, has been released to CPAN:
http://wagner.elixus.org/~autrijus/dist/Perl6-Pugs-6.2.0.tar.gz
SIZE (Perl6-Pugs-6.2.0.tar.gz) = 642482
MD5 (Perl6-Pugs-6.2.0.tar.gz) = 8d5438d49db872ffe2394fd4995d335b
It repres
Hey all, not sure if I'm just missing some obvious source of
information, but I used trim() as a function in a cookbook example,
then realized that it's not even in S29...
There is a brief mention of trim(), as well as words() (odd as the
words() function may seem, to me at least), at
http://tinyu
Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
Yuval Kogman wrote:
You can perform set operations on them:
[!-2]
Hmm, that would produce a boolean index.
is the subscript for everything but the second to last element.
By using a context enforcer (subscript [] ?, maybe since lists are
lazyy they can just be subscripts
gcomnz wrote:
Hey all, not sure if I'm just missing some obvious source of
information, but I used trim() as a function in a cookbook example,
then realized that it's not even in S29...
There is a brief mention of trim(), as well as words() (odd as the
words() function may seem, to me at least), at
> Rod Adams wrote:
> Well, some form of words() exists... only spelled q:w//, with various
> doublings of q and w available, some of which can be spelled <> or «»,
> though to be honest, I've lost track of how often the meanings of those
> as quoters has changed. I suspect S02 or S03 would have th
> I agree, with my (probably wrong) impression that words() was a "split
> a string into words" function, I was thinking to myself bloat, but
> then I was also reminding myself that Perl's power as a natural
> language text processor has always been a premium feature (somehow
> even prior to full U
Hey folks,
I wanted to delurk and address an issue that may need clarification in
regards to hyper operators.
Quoting S03:
If one argument is insufficiently dimensioned, Perl "upgrades" it:
(3,8,2,9,3,8) >>-<< 1; # (2,7,1,8,2,7)
Now in this example case, it's pretty clear that the s
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 09:52:38PM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
: gcomnz wrote:
:
: >Hey all, not sure if I'm just missing some obvious source of
: >information, but I used trim() as a function in a cookbook example,
: >then realized that it's not even in S29...
: >
: >There is a brief mention of trim(
39 matches
Mail list logo
