Howdy,
I've been doing a bunch of NQP and PIR coding, where Pmichaud++ has been
trying to support some kind of POD syntax. With the release of the S26
draft, he has tightened the parsing to follow more of the rules laid out
in the spec, and after a few months, I've noticed that the trend (for
This is a p6 question, not an NQP question - I'm citing the NQP only
because it's my current example. So mentioning p6 features not currently
in NQP is totally appropriate.
What I mean by converting code into data is simply that a run-time
version of metaprogramming will generally translate the
Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 18:58 -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
I know that I could 'metaprogram' this stuff by using string
manipulation on the various method names, and then calling a
(self-built) call_method($obj, $method_name, ...args...) function.
I'm writing some NQP, which isn't quite perl6, and I've got this method:
method afterall_methods() {
my @methods := self._afterall_methods;
unless @methods {
@methods := self.fetch_afterall_methods;
self._afterall_methods(@methods);
}
re
This whole thread seems oriented around two points:
1. Strings should not carry the burden of umpty-ump filesystem checking
methods.
2. It should be possible to specify a filesystem entity using something
nearly indistinguishable from standard string syntax.
I agree with the first, but the
How about "Rake"?
=Austin
Richard Hainsworth wrote:
Referring to Patrick's blog about an official 'useable' version of
Rakudo, a suggestion:
Since Rakudo* (not sure how it is to be written) is intended to be a
cut-down version of perl6.0.0 that is useable, how about Rakudo-lite?
Its just
S05 mentions the magic pattern in two locations, but I cannot
find a specification of the interaction between and the
ratcheting {rule/token} status.
Specifically, is
token {
...
}
going to match the same pattern as
rule {
...
}
??
I ask because (I just did it, and) with rules enco
Mark J. Reed wrote:
I'm all for not having any variety of log() in the default namespace.
Regardless, mathematical functions should follow mathematical norms.
Changing Perl tradition is one thing, but we have centuries, sometimes
millennia, of tradition to deal with in the mathematical realm. It
David Green wrote:
It occurs to me that "log" is a pretty short name for a function I
rarely use. (In fact, I'm not sure I've ever used it in perl.) On
the other hand, I -- and a thousand or so CPAN modules -- are always
logging stuff in that other popular computer sense. (All right, that
n
Howdy,
One of the "problems" in recursive-descent parsing is constructs that
look a lot alike at the front, only to differ at the end -- a sort of
end-weight pathology. The example I'm thinking of is the similarity
between variable and function declarations in 'C'.
extern int foo = 0;
Sorry, didn't do a reply-all on this.
--- Begin Message ---
How about "Parrot"?
I think the original point, along with one of the original claims for
Parrot, was that Parrot would not just be the "Perl internals engine"
but would be general enough to run other languages. (Specifically, there
I'm using the PGE/PCT tools for working with grammars on Parrot, and I
have to say that while there's a lot of power, there's very little
debugging support. What's more, the debugging that is possible seems to
be "parrot debugging" --i.e., single-stepping through routines, etc. --
instead of "g
Jon Lang wrote:
Agreed. Given the frequency with which « and » come up in Perl 6, I'd
love to be able to have a simple keyboard shortcut that produces these
two characters. Unfortunately, I am often stuck using a Windows
system when coding; and the easiest method that I have available to me
th
You write:
> I’m not sure what the heart of Perl 6 would be, but I think we’ve
identified the spleen
> with the |Capture|. In the human body, most people have no idea what
the spleen does.
> It sits there out of the way doing its thing, and we can’t live
without it.
I, along with a host of o
Larry Wall wrote:
Which is a very interesting topic, with connections to type theory,
scope/domain management, and security issues (such as the possibility
of a DoS attack on the translation tables).
I think that a DoS attack on Unicode would be called "IBM/Windows Code
Pages." The rest of
Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote:
On May 18, 2009, at 14:16 , Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 11:11:32AM +0200, Helmut Wollmersdorfer wrote:
3) Details of 'life-time', round-trip.
Which is a very interesting topic, with connections to type theory,
scope/domain management, and security
Mark J. Reed wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Austin Hastings
wrote:
If you haven't read the PDD, it's a good start.
I get all that, really. I still question the necessity of mapping
each grapheme to a single integer. A single *value*, sure.
length($weird_graphe
If you haven't read the PDD, it's a good start.
To summarize, probably oversimplifying badly:
1. A grapheme is a character *as seen on the page.* That is, if
composing "a" + "dot above" + "dot below" produces an a with dots above
and below it, then THAT is the grapheme.
2. Unicode has a lot
Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
Actually that makes me wonder now whether it’s actually a good
idea at all to make the function parametrisable at all. Even
`.ltrim.rtrim` is shorter and easier than `.trim(:start,:end)`!
How about .trim(:l, :r) with both as the default? And if the rtl crowd
makes
Actually, I proposed some years ago allowing "separable verbs" --
function/method/operator names with spaces in them, that could in fact
bracket or intersperse themselves with other parameters.
This would be a way of writing "if ... elsif ... else ..." for example.
I wonder if whitespace in id
That sounds cool. Did you do it at the editor level, or at the keyboard
level?
=Austin
Bob Rogers wrote:
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:07:33 -0400
I'm still somewhat ambivalent about this, myself. My previous
experience with hyphens in identif
At a minimum, there are more multi-word identifiers than there are
statements involving subtraction. Further, '-' is basic, while all of
[_A-Z] are not.
Ergo, a multi-word-identifier is easier to type than a
multi_word_identifier or a multiWordIdentifier.
The older I get, the more I like Cob
TSa wrote:
BTW, what is a flack?
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flak_%28disambiguation%29
Originally, (FL)ug(a)bwehr (K)anone -- German 88mm anti-aircraft cannon
of WWII.
Subsequently, any anti-air gun or cannon, particularly when fired at a
position rather than aimed at a particular
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
chromatic chromatic-at-wgz.org |Perl 6| wrote:
All classes imply the existence of a role of the same name.
Please justify that.
A class is an defined, referenceable entity with a "signature" composed
of the bits visible to a particular caller. It is possible, by
d
Jonathan makes an excellent point about s and S. In fact, there's
probably a "little language" out there for this.
I don't think it needs to be in the core, though. But you could put in
some kind of "hook" mechanism, so that detecting the presence of \s or
whatever caused the string to be trea
Darren Duncan wrote:
Larry had some ideas for dealing with the problem, but this is a
matter that should be more widely discussed, particularly among
implementers and such.
A general thought is that a parameter could be marked so that any
argument passed through it is effectively snapshot (
Thomas Wittek wrote:
chromatic wrote:
theproblemlinguisticallyspeakingisthatsometimes [snipped]
I can't remember that I said that you shouldn't separate your
expressions (by punctation/whitspaces),
$.but! (*adding$ %*characters _+that^# &$might) @#not_ !#be()
!&necessary_ *#$doesn't! *
Jonathan Lang wrote:
What got me thinking about this was that I couldn't find decent
documentation about Capture literals in the synopses.
Are Capture literals going to replace or unify the "assuming"/"currying"
behaviors?
=Austin
Smylers wrote:
Mark A. Biggar writes:
Austin Hastings wrote:
Gaal Yahas wrote:
list [==] 0, 0, 1, 2, 2;
# bool::false?
# (bool::true, bool::true, bool::false, bool::false, bool::false)
(And I'm with Smylers on this one: show me a useful example, p
Mark A. Biggar wrote:
Austin Hastings wrote:
Gaal Yahas wrote:
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 04:02:35PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: I'm probably not thinking hard enough, so if anyone can come up
with an
: implementation please give it :) Otherwise, how about we add
this to
: the lan
Gaal Yahas wrote:
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 04:02:35PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: I'm probably not thinking hard enough, so if anyone can come up with an
: implementation please give it :) Otherwise, how about we add this to
: the language?
Maybe that's just what reduce operators do in list c
Audrey Tang wrote:
>Damian Conway wrote:
>
>
>>Juerd wrote:
>>
>>
and propose ".:" as a solution
>>>$xyzzy.:foo();
>>>$fooz. :foo();
>>>$foo. :foo();
>>>
>>>
>>This would make the enormous semantic difference between:
>>
>> foo. :bar()
>>
>>and:
Damian Conway wrote:
I'm not enamoured of the .# I must confess. Nor of the #. either. I
wonder whether we need the dot at all. Or, indeed, the full power of
arbitrary delimiters after the octothorpe.
What if we restricted the delimiters to the five types of balanced
brackets? And then simpl
Damian Conway wrote:
Larry wrote:
> I really prefer the form where .#() looks like a no-op method
> call, and can provide the visual dot for a postfix extender. It
> also is somewhat less likely to happen by accident the #., I
> think. And I think the front-end shape of .# is more
> recognizab
Rob Kinyon wrote:
>OOP is all about black-box abstraction. To that end, three items have been
>identified as being mostly necessary to achieve that:
>1) Polymorphism - aka Liskov substitutability
>2) Inheritance - aka specialization
>3) Encapsulation
>
>P5 excels at #1, does #2 ok, an
Larry Wall wrote:
>Whatever the answer, it probably has to apply to
>
>my @a;
>@a[0] = '1';
>@a[2] = '3';
>print exists $a[1];
>
>as well as the explicit delete case. Are we going to pitch an exception for
>writing beyond the end of an array? That seems a bit anti-Perlish.
>
>
Dave Whipp wrote:
> Today I wrote some perl5 code for the umpteenth time. Basically:
>
> for( my $i=0; $i< $#ARGV; $i++ )
> {
> next unless $ARGV[$i] eq "-f";
> $i++;
> $ARGV[$i] = absolute_filename $ARGV[$i];
> }
> chdir "foo";
> exec "bar", @ARGV;
>
> I'm trying to work
Luke Palmer wrote:
>There are two reasons I've posted to perl6-language this time. First
>of all, is this acceptable behavior? Is it okay to die before the
>arguments to an undefined sub are evaluated?
>
>
>
Something like:
widgetMethod new Widget;
The best argument I've got for forcing the
I retract my opposition to "err". After coding this:
try
{
try { path = f.getCanonicalPath(); }
catch (Exception e) { path = f.getAbsolutePath(); }
}
catch (Exception e) { path = f.toString(); }
I am now a convert. To the extent that we are
Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
>Juerd wrote:
>
>
>>Ingo Blechschmidt skribis 2005-10-10 20:08 (+0200):
>>
>>
>>>Named arguments can -- under the proposal -- only ever exist in
>>>calls.
>>>
>>>
>>Which leaves us with no basic datastructure that can hold both
>>positional and named arguments.
Miroslav Silovic wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> * expands its RHS and evaluate it as if it was written literally.
>>
>> I'd like @_ or @?ARGS or something like that to be a *-able array that
>> will be guaranteed to be compatible with the current sub's signature.
>>
> This sounds nice, tho
Stuart Cook wrote:
>On 10/10/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>The overrides have nothing to do with it. That a=>1 will *always* be a
>positional, because by the time it reaches the argument list, it's a value
>(not a syntactic form). The o
Stuart Cook wrote:
>On 10/10/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>What about whitespace?
>>
>> foo (a => 42); # Note space
>>
>>Is that the first case (subcall with named arg) or the second case (sub
>>with positional p
Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>while fixing bugs for the imminent Pugs 6.2.10 release, we ran into
>several issues with magical pairs (pairs which unexpectedly participate
>in named binding) again. Based on Luke's "Demagicalizing pairs" thread
>[1], #perl6 refined the exact semantics [2].
>
>The
Yuval Kogman wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 02:31:12 -0400, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
>
>>Yuval Kogman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Stylistically I would tend to disagree, actually. I think it's cleaner to
>>>use exception handling for this.
Yuval Kogman wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 14:27:30 -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
>
>
>>On 10/6/05, Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>when i can't open a file and $! tells me why i couldn't open, i
>>>can resume with an alternative handle that is supposed to be t
Miroslav Silovic wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> And that was never quite resolved. The biggest itch was with
>> operators that have no identity, and operators whose codomain is not
>> the same as the domain (like <, which takes numbers but returns
>> bools).
>>
>> Anyway, that syntax was
Damian Conway wrote:
> Austin Hastings wrote:
>
>> All of these have the same solution:
>>
>> @list = ...
>> for [undef, @list[0...]] ¥ @list ¥ [EMAIL PROTECTED], undef] -> $last, $curr,
>> $next {
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> Which is al
Damian Conway wrote:
> Rather than addition Yet Another Feature, what's wrong with just using:
>
> for @list ¥ @list[1...] -> $curr, $next {
> ...
> }
>
> ???
1. Requirement to repeat the possibly complex expression for the list.
2. Possible high cost of generating the list.
3. Po
TSa wrote:
>
> The view I believe Yuval is harboring is the one examplified
> in movies like The Matrix or The 13th Floor and that underlies
> the holodeck of the Enterprise: you can leave the intrinsic
> causality of the running program and inspect it. Usually that
> is called debugging. But this
Yuval Kogman wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 13:52:54 -0400, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
>
[Bunches of stuff elided.]
>>A million years ago, $Larry pointed out that when we were able to use
>>'is just a' classifications on P6 concepts, it indicated that we were
>
Matt Fowles wrote:
>Austin~
>
>On 9/29/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Plus it's hard to talk about backwards. If you say
>>
>>for @l -> ?$prev, $curr, ?$next {...}
>>
>>what happens when you have two items i
Luke Palmer wrote:
>>On 9/29/05, Dave Whipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
for grep {defined} @in -> $item, ?$next {
print $item unless defined $next && $item eq $next;
}
>>
>>
>
>>This is an interesting idea. Perhaps "for" (and "map") shift the
>>minimu
Dave Whipp wrote:
> Imagine you're writing an implementation of the unix "uniq" function:
>
>my $prev;
>for grep {defined} @in -> $x {
>print $x unless defined $prev && $x eq $prev;
>$prev = $x;
>}
>
> This feels clumsy. $prev seems to get in the way of what I'm trying
TSa wrote:
> HaloO,
>
> Yuval Kogman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 11:46:37 -0500, Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
>>
>>> The recent thread on Expectuations brought back to mind something
>>> I've been
>>> thinking for a while. In short, I propose that "use fatal" be on by
>>> default, and
>>> that
Michele Dondi wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Joshua Gatcomb wrote:
>
>> Cheers,
>> Joshua Gatcomb
>> a.k.a. Limbic~Region
>
>
> Oops... I hadn't noticed that you ARE L~R...
>
In the tradition of i18n, etc., I had assumed that L~R was shorthand for
Luke Palmer. You may want to keep up the old tradi
On a related note:
Suppose I have a function with a non-obvious arity: I might, in a
desperate attempt to find billable hours, describe the arity as a trait:
sub sandwich($bread, $meat, $cheese, $condiment1, $qty1, ...)
does arity ({ 3 + 2 * any(1..Inf); });
That's easy enough for trivi
--- James Mastros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Millsa Erlas wrote:
> > I have thought of an interesting idea that may allow Perl 6 to make
> the
> > $, @, and % optional on many uses of variables. This involves
> simply
> > extending the function namespace to include all kinds of
> structures, a
--- Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
>
> >
> > You mean @a = [[1,2,3]]? Which is quite what you need for multi
> > dimensional arrays anyway @m = [[1,2],[3,4]] and here you use
> > of course @m[0][1] to pull out the 2. I'm not sure if this
> automatically
> > mak
Larry Wall wrote:
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 08:24:23PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-04-06 11:10 (-0700):
: > $$ref follow the ref list to the actual object.
:
: my $foo;
: my $bar = \$foo;
: my $quux = \$bar;
: my $xyzzy = \$quux;
:
: How then, with only $xyzzy,
Juerd wrote:
Rod Adams skribis 2005-03-21 14:25 (-0600):
if $expr {
nothing;
}
is harder to get confused over, IMO
Except writing something when you mean nothing is kind of weird. It
makes sense in rules because it doesn't usually make sense to match
nothingness, but for blocks, I'd ha
Luke Palmer wrote:
Austin Hasting writes:
How do I concisely code a loop that reads in lines of a file, then
calls mysub() on each letter in each line?
Or each xml tag on the line?
And I guess the answer is the same as in Perl 5. I don't understand
what the problem is with Perl 5's approac
Matthew Walton wrote:
Austin Hastings wrote:
But there's no clean way to make some of them temporary and some
persistent.
This seems like a legitimate place for "saying what you intend", viz:
for (my $n is longlasting = 0, $m = 1; ...) {...}
Albeit that's a lame example of h
David Storrs wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 07:35:19PM -0500, Joe Gottman wrote:
In Perl5, given code like
for (my $n = 0; $n < 10; ++$n) {.}
the control variable $n will be local to the for loop. In the equivalent
Perl6 code
loop my $n = 0; $n < 10; ++$n {.}
$n will not be local to the
Luke Palmer wrote:
Well, it'll still get that bad rap because it's as syntactically
flexible as ever (moreso even), so people have all the freedom they want
to write code ugly as sin.
Anyway, if you want to see more Perl 6 syntax, why don't you post some
"how do I"s to the list, and I'll reply with
Matt Fowles wrote:
Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03
s/conses/consensus/g ?
Larry Wall wrote:
Another problem we've run into is naming if there are multiple assertions
of the same name. If the capture name is just the alpha part of the
assertion, then we could allow an optional number, and still recognize
it as a "ws":
Except I can well imagine people wanting number
Luke Palmer wrote:
class MyStream {
has $.stream;
method :send_one ($item) {
$.stream.send($item);
}
method send ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) {
.:send_one("BEGIN");
for @data {
.:send_one($_);
}
.:send_one("
Luke Palmer wrote:
Larry Wall writes:
Any foo() can return a list. That list can be a Lazy list. So the
ordinary return can say:
return 0...;
to return an infinite list, or even
return 0..., 0...;
Is it just me, or did you just return Ï*2?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal#Arit
Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 11:52:22AM -0700, Dan Brian wrote:
: >If I went with "get", the opposite would be "unget" for both historical
: >and huffmaniacal reasons.
Why? (I get the huffman, not the history.) Is it just a nod to unshift?
Given the existence of a unary = for abbrev
David Wheeler wrote:
On Dec 6, 2004, at 7:38 AM, Austin Hastings wrote:
for =<> {...}
I dub the...the fish operator!
:-)
Back before there was a WWW, I used an editor called "tgif". It was
written in france, and part of the idiom was to have two GUI buttons
showing respe
Smylers wrote:
Larry Wall writes:
But then are we willing to rename shift/unshift to pull/put?
Yes. C is a terrible name; when teaching Perl I feel
embarrassed on introducing it.
No!
But I'd be willing to rename them to get/put.
'Pull' is the opposite of 'push', but 'pop' already works.
Larry Wall wrote:
But here's the kicker. The null filename can again represent the
standard filter input, so we end up with Perl 5's
while (<>) {...}
turning into
for =<> {...}
Two more issues: idiom, and topification
= Topification:
There are cases in P5 when I *don't* want
while (<
John Macdonald wrote:
The problem with "interpolate if you can or leave it alone for
later" is that when later comes around you're in a quandry.
Is the string "$var" that is in the final result there because
it was "$var" in the original and couldn't be interpolated,
or was it a $foo that had its v
Austin Hastings wrote:
Larry Wall wrote:
And now, Piers is cackling madly at Matt: welcome to "perl6-hightraffic!"
:-)
=Austin
Larry Wall wrote:
* We get the cute, clean and rather more typeable
$var[3]
No more or less typeable for me, or anyone else who can remap their
keyboard. I'm presuming there's something costly about {} on non-US
keyboards, but how much does it cost? and do those non-US perl hacks use
rema
Every once in a while some fascist proposes installing TV cameras in all
public places, and I think, "Oh, God! Nothing good can come of this!"
and resist heartily.
Larry Wall wrote:
The only bizarre and inexplicable thing that has occurred to me in the last week is that I fell
into a canal in V
Rich Morin wrote:
On a vaguely-related topic, I am reminded of another friend's
desire to be able to redefine floating point values as quartets
of values. Each operation would then be done using all possible
rounding options (in the IEEE standard) and the results checked
for "significant" variatio
Michele Dondi wrote:
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, Matt Fowles wrote:
Google groups has nothing for Perl6.language between October 2 and 14.
Is this really the case? (I had not signed up until shortly before
Yes: no traffic at all for quite a while...
Does this mean that we're done? :)
The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
I tried, I really did, but I'm afraid that I must raise the white flag
to my teacher training for the next while and give up writing the Perl 6
Summary until at least after Christmas.
Bad food, lousy dental care, and now the childrens' education is
entrusted to a ch
Juerd wrote:
Austin Hastings skribis 2004-09-24 12:05 (-0400):
Actually, that raises a good point: Should "3 foo" convert to number 3,
or should it convert to C<3 but remainder(" foo")> ?
Would the remainder then be dropped when the numeric value changes?
I
Jeff Clites wrote:
(B
(B> On Sep 23, 2004, at 5:27 PM, Edward Peschko wrote:
(B>
(B>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 08:15:08AM -0700, Jeff Clites wrote:
(B>>
(B
(B just like the transformation of a string into a number, and from a
(B number to a string. Two algorithmically different t
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 07:35:46PM +0100, Richard Proctor wrote:
: Therefore should:
:
: $?os Be which operating system it is being compiled on
: $*os Be which operating system it is being executed on
:
: Some of the other special variables may have a similar dual personality.
Luke Palmer wrote:
Judging from this, maybe we ought to have :not.
Anyway, it's still possible:
$my_rex = rx/fo*/ & none(rx/^foo$/);
For sure. On a side note, there should be a negating match operator for
use inside:
rx/\d+/ & none(rx/1984/)
could get awfully long if you had to handle sev
I was thinking about removing files this morning, and realized that I
wish rm supported inclusion/exclusion.
In particular, I wanted to remove "* but not Makefile" (since my
Makefile uses lwp-download to re-fetch the source code, etc.)
It occurred to me to wonder: can P6's c do the same thing?
chromatic wrote:
On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 14:26, Austin Hastings wrote:
Dan Hursh wrote:
generalimpose scalarimpose list
-----
D$foo.eat$foo.bite$foo.gobble
N$foo.look$foo.peek$foo.peruse
hmm, I don&#
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 12:52:56PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: Unfortunately, the only obvious one, 's', is taken.
I remind myself that 'S' is equally obvious, and not taken. Like _,
it suffers from spacing issues, but could be the ASCII backup for
the § character. (As Y is likel
Dan Hursh wrote:
Peter Behroozi wrote:
I'm not particular to any of the verbs used yet, but maybe that's
because I don't think of the <> as a general iterator, but more of a
gobbler-type creature (and formerly a globber, too). Could we try:
for $foo.fetch { ... } #or
for $foo.grab { ... } #or
for
--- chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-07-19 at 14:04, David Storrs wrote:
>
> > Second, I would suggest that it NOT go in a library...this is
> > reasonably serious under-the-hood magic and should be integrated
> into
> > the core for efficiency.
>
> You must have amazingly fast
--- "Adam D. Lopresto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The modifier to turn off warnings on a line would be ;), winking at
> us to let us know it's up to something.
I wondered about paren-after-semi, and thought about C. Which
led me to C<@array[a;b;c]>, then to (a;b;c;), which let me to this:
Given
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If {...} supplies list context by default, most
> intepolations are either the same length or shorter:
>
> $($foo) {$foo}
> @(@foo) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> $(@foo) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL
--- The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, so the interview was on Tuesday 13th of July.
> It went well; I'm going to be a maths teacher.
"As usual, we begin with maths-geometry:
In Mathematics last week, one Pythagoras suggested there might be a
relationship between the sides
--- Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> >
> > Your case 2 is easy: "my Str $passwds is File("/etc/passwd") is
> > const". With that, we might even catch your error at compile
> > time.
> >
> >>/file/open/ and we're back where we started.
> >
> > Except that we've lost a l
> -Original Message-
> From: Juerd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, 17 July, 2004 01:53 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: :)
>
>
> Do we have a :) operator yet?
>
It's an adverbial modifier on the core expression type. Does
nothing, but it acts as a line terminator when nothi
--- Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using C<:w> and C<:r> would at least match what C<:w> and C<:r> do in
> 'Vi' ...
That seems intuitive:
my $fh = open 'foo.txt', :w;
$fh.say "Hello, world!";
$fh = open 'foo.txt', :e;# Ha, ha, just kidding!
$fh.say <<<-EOF
If wifey shuns
--- Jonadab the Unsightly One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course, this leaves open the question of whether there are any
> fairly common filename extensions that happen to be spelled the same
> as a method on Perl6's string class, that might ought to have a
> warning generated... Are there a
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While that probably works, I think better style would be to use a
> comma:
>
> my $fh = open ">$filename", :excl;
>
> That explicitly passes :excl to open as a term in a list rather
> than relying on the magical properties of :foo to find the preced
--- Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
> > Using google(+perl6 +"cartesian product") would have led you to the
> > conclusion that this is already included. I hope this is horribly
> > wrong,
--- Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I apologize in advance for posting yet another "suggestion" without
> having full knowledge of all apocalypses, and I fear (for a very
> positive meaning of "fear") that the answer will be: "but that is
> already available".
Using google(+perl6 +"c
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hmm, maybe that means that language-dependent graphemes are called
> "langs", which I suppose is short for "langemes".
Dangerously close to "legumes", there. Perhaps we could refer to
entities matches by regexes as "peas"...
=Austin
1 - 100 of 508 matches
Mail list logo
