Miércoles 14 Abril 2004 14:18, Juerd wrote:
I propose to use ` as a simple hash subscriptor, as an alternative
to {} and . It would only be useable for \w+ keys or perhaps
-?\w+. As with methods, a simple atomic (term exists only in
perlreftut, afaix, but I don't know another word to describe
Viernes 19 Marzo 2004 13:08, Andy Wardley wrote:
I'm so happy! I just found out, totally by accident, that I can
type the « and » characters by pressing AltGr + Z and AltGr + X,
respectively.
Apologies if this is common knowledge, but it was news to me, and I
thought I'd share this little
Friday 13 February 2004 15:02, Dan Sugalski wrote:
If you're *really* looking to get fancy, why not just allow the
sort specification to be done with SQL? Comfortable,
well-understood, already has a decade or so of stupid things welded
into it [...]
Heck, you could even unify map, grep,
block. Perhaps we should just go with that:
property $foo = 0;
Or whatever word we choose, I don't care:
prop $foo = 0;
What about:
prof $foo;
$foo = 0;
Is this equivalent to prof $foo = 0? If it is not, I would claim
this to be a major violation of the principle of
Friday 14 March 2003 20:06, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
3) If an untyped var is used for a typed parameter, a simple
dataflow analysis is used to determine whether the compiler can
guarantee that, at that point, an untyped var will _always_
contain values of a known, specific type. If so, the type
Damian Conway wrote:
But large projects -- where typing will be most important --
*can't* deal with that. That's the point of typing: to specify and
enforce interface contracts. At compile-time if at all possible.
One quick question about this. If I write:
sub foo (Bar $f) {..}
my $x =
I have to wonder how many people actually like this syntax, and how
many only say they do because it's Damian Conway who proposed it.
And map/grep aren't specialized syntax, you could do the same
thing with a sub with a prototype of (block, *@list).
I have to say that I am not specially
Michael G Schwern wrote:
and that's just entirely too much work. I'd love to be able to do
it with a grep like thing.
(@switches, @args) = seperate /^-/, @ARGV;
seperate() simply returns two lists. One of elements which match,
one of elements which don't. I think Perl 6 will allow
Damian Conway wrote:
The formulation of coroutines I favour doesn't work like that.
Every time you call a suspended coroutine it resumes from immediately
after the previous Cyield than suspended it. *And* that Cyield
returns the new argument list with which it was resumed.
So you can write
1) We find a team of volunteers who are willing to own the
task of converting each Apocalypse into a complete design. If
nobody wants to write the Perl 6 user manual, then we might as well
give up and go home now. So far we only need to find four, though,
so it Might Just Work.
I would
We started off with an intense RFC process. This produced many good
ideas, not-so-good ideas, and ideas with potential but desperately
needing polish. If you'd like a recap, you might try MJD's article
on the subject (http://www.perl.com/lpt/a/2000/11/perl6rfc.html).
One of the major things
Wednesday 30 October 2002 22:08, Michael Lazzaro escribió:
On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote:
for a; b - $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] };
I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be
solved if the above were just written:
for (a;b) -
And maybe:
A bitwise operator is just a logic operator scoped to a set of
bits.
That's why I can't accept a characterization of
++|+X - bitwise operations on int
+= +|= +X=
~~|~X - bitwise operations on str
~= ~|=
Speaking about macros, I renember reading somewhere something about
Scheme hygenic macros, but i didn't really understood it.
Do they solve the maintenance problems of Lisp macros? Would they be
applicable to perl?
Thanks for any tips,
-angel
At the moment I like like the best, actually...
like is beautiful for old-style regex matching, but I find it
confusing for the new smart abilities:
$varlike Class:Foo # $var is instance of Class:Foo
$item like %hash # %hash{$item} is true
$digit like (0..10) #
Mathematically, 1/0 is whatever you define it to be.
Well, sure. That's as axiomatic as saying, mathematically, the
number one is whatever you define it to be. But a mathematical
system that has a definition which is inconsistent with the rest of
the system is a flawed one. If you let
Hi,
Many thanks Michael, this is very useful, really. I had lost all the
OO discussion and this document is very helpful.
I really like the part of context transformations, I hope something
like this gets in.
Just a silly note:
Recipe 1.9: Using Subroutines as Objects
Problem:
You want
Larry said:
BTW, latest leaning is toward = rather than //= for parameter
defaults, ...
Horray!
Sorry. Couldn't resist. :-)
-angel
Simple men are happy with simple presents
Hi,
I was reading Damian's new excellent diary entry in which he explains the
new currying syntax for Perl6.
(For the lazy ones it's reachable at
http://www.yetanother.org/damian/diary_latest.html)
This new feature allows to partially fill place-holder functions, such as:
my div = {$^x /
my Complex $c = 3+4i;
my Complex $d = 4i;
my $plain = $c / $d;
Does $plain (which is actually '3' after reducing) get promoted to
Complex, or does the result from the division get demoted?
In a related matter, computer languages with Symbolic Mathematics
capabilities, like Mapple, let you
my $plain = $c - $d : Math::Complex # 3.0 + 0i
sqrt(2 : Math::Integers) # - exception or not-a-number
Not a bad idea,. I beleive that the perl6 adjective operator
(for functions) will be a semicolon, not a colon. I'm not
sure how it is planned to apply it to operators.
Its also
Simon wrote:
: Have you an idea about what will be the 'final'
: parser for the Perl 6 compiler ? (LALR(1), like Perl 5 ?)
:
:Yep, LALR1, probably yacc generated.
I recall reading somewhere that Perl6 was going to be parsed by something
very much like Parse::RecDescent, just that faster.
¿has
the following be correct perl6?
@sorted_by_size =
@files.map - $file { [$file, -s $file] }
.sort - @a, @b { @a[1] = @b[1] }
.map - @pair { @pair[0] }
--
Angel Faus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is doing a great job of taking the coolest things
of other languages and integrating them into a choerent design, so i do
have a hope. [:)]
This is of course related to Ruby's iterators, that take a somehow
opposite solution to solve a similar problem.
-
Angel Faus
[EMAIL
Sorry for the 4 times posts, i was testing a new mail program and it
didn't prove too good.
Now i feel so ashamed :-[
-angel
choose which way to go I am happy.
The whole point was about economy of language constructs, but that's perl,
and in perl free will is more important than economy, isn'it?
---
Angel Faus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
vLex.com
""
Description:
""
Description:
""
value. On the other hand,
a RFC 207-like notation adds a lot more power with a single
addition to the language.
Just my 5 cents ;-)
Angel Faus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
27 matches
Mail list logo
