Author: lwall
Date: 2009-01-22 00:35:56 +0100 (Thu, 22 Jan 2009)
New Revision: 24994
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod
docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod
Log:
[S02,S03] delete some .pos fossils
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S02-bits.pod
=
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 13:44, Ovid
wrote:
> - Original Message
>
>> From: Moritz Lenz
>
>> * the word 'is' is overloaded in Perl 6
>>* if we export subs is() and ok(), we clutter the
>> namespace with subs with short names
>>* is() is rather imprecise; it doesn't say *h
- Original Message
> From: Moritz Lenz
> * the word 'is' is overloaded in Perl 6
>* if we export subs is() and ok(), we clutter the
> namespace with subs with short names
>* is() is rather imprecise; it doesn't say *how*
> things are compared.
> So Larry and Patr
Author: lwall
Date: 2009-01-21 21:49:51 +0100 (Wed, 21 Jan 2009)
New Revision: 24993
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod
docs/Perl6/Spec/S12-objects.pod
Log:
[S03] more alignment with STD
[S12] monkey patching now requires a special "use MONKEY_PATCHING" at the top
Modified: docs/P
Author: moritz
Date: 2009-01-21 20:54:56 +0100 (Wed, 21 Jan 2009)
New Revision: 24991
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod
Log:
[S29] changed outdated notice about document location, noticed by Coke++
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S29-functions.pod
=
On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 14:23 +, Peter Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:35:50 +0100, Carl Mäsak wrote:
> > I'm trying to explain to myself why I don't like this idea at all. I'm
> > only partially successful. Other people seem to have no problem with it,
> > so I might just be wrong, or part
The skip multisub in Rakudo's Test.pm is defined like this:
multi sub skip() is export() { proclaim(1, "# SKIP"); }
multi sub skip($desc) is export() { proclaim(1, "# SKIP " ~ $desc); }
multi sub skip($count, $desc) is export() {
for 1..$count {
proclaim(
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:35:50 +0100, Carl Mäsak wrote:
> Moritz (>):
>> So Larry and Patrick developed the idea of creating an adverb on the
>> test operator instead:
>>
>>$x == 1e5 :ok('the :ok makes this is a test');
>
> I'm trying to explain to myself why I don't like this idea at all. I'
Moritz (>):
> So Larry and Patrick developed the idea of creating an
> adverb on the test operator instead:
>
>$x == 1e5 :ok('the :ok makes this is a test');
I'm trying to explain to myself why I don't like this idea at all. I'm
only partially successful. Other people seem to have no problem
(Daniel Ruoso also proposed to call the adverb :test
instead of :ok, making it easier to read but a bit
longer; my happiness doesn't depend on the exact name,
but of course we can discuss it once we have settled
on this scheme, if we do so).
My two-cents worth:
The adverb on a boolean chan
10 matches
Mail list logo
