out of it.
The design team shouldn't need to oversee day-to-day, just tweak the
docs you produce. The summaries shouldn't need to report on the weekly
discussions, just report on what you've released. Much like the old
sub-lists would step away to discuss some particular topic h
to quit asking rhetorical
questions.
Be kind to Piers. Be kind to the readers. Don't have separate but
equal discussions in two different lists. Weed out the cruft, fill in
the gaps.
Interpolate, don't extrapolate.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
e of questions and proposals
> re-examining issues covered in previous A&E's following each new release,
> p6d hopes to annotate its documentation to include the various trade-offs
> involving alternative syntax, semantics, implementation impacts, ideological
> ax grinding, etc. s
s that can typecast
> to/from str, int, bool, etc. This gets into Perl6 OO, but we may need
> to request some preliminary decisions before then, because the
> implications are substantial.
and again...
>
> Let's open these for discussion. Questions/proposals/issues,
On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 14:41, Larry Wall wrote:
> And maybe:
>
> A bitwise operator is just a logic operator scoped to a set of bits.
Hypo-operators. :-)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
iform
width, in which case it is only going to match one thing and one thing
only. Whether that will be an issue with variable-width characters in a
class is largely going to rely on the semantics that are dictated.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|raba.com)
;$i is rw>, why, it
> should work find. :-)
>
> : (Or, more generally, given a for loop with a "my", how sould perl52perl6
> : deal with it?
>
> Probably just by slapping an extra set of curlies around it.
Umm. didn't you say bare blocks were going away?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/ and
> likewise for http://dev.perl.org/perl6/status then I would most
> appreciate it. :-)
If there aren't any objections, I'll add this as a TODO along with the
weekly summary. [ Which I haven't done for last week yet. :-( ]
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ourse, then there's Damian, who will reach the
point of doing everything that's impossible simultaneously... and in
constant time.
>
> And should follow-ups to this go, perhaps, to [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
If we were to discuss *why* it's good for non-professional folks, probably.
I'll let someone else cross-post if they feel it's necessary.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
for them, it's
usually necessary only to stress the version number as a part of the name.
For these people, it isn't just Perl - it's Perl 5. Which Perl 6 is not.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
uating whitespace for concatenation.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
as C's declaration).
But the flies are spontaneously generating! ;-)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I really cared about was map, grep, and
sort. The rest was was simply an extension to the implausable end.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 20 January 2002 21:00, Damian Conway wrote:
> Bryan C. Warnock asked:
> > Since the parentheses are no longer required, will the expressions
> > lose or retain their own scope level? (I'm assuming that whatever
> > rule applies, it will hold true if you d
pect") with another set of questions ("why doesn't
this work the way I expect"). I'm sure that would hold true for any amount
of change, so I want to be prepared with the rationale and explanations.
Thanks for answering my queries.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sub,
and pass a reference to it directly to LAST, for instance:
LAST $coderef;
or would I simply wrap it?
LAST {
&$coderef;
}
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
}
LAST {
print "LAST\n";
...
}
code();
last;
}
}
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
exception within current block
> KEEPExecutes on normal exit of the current block
> UNDOExecutes on "un-normal" exit of the current block
That matches my list.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
missed it... but there's no trace of it in the
> > archives of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Or any other perl6 list.
> >
> > Don't tell me that is normal.
>
> It's a worry. Also odd is that Slashdot hasn't picked it up yet.
Developers' section.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ser and the person.
That applies to *any* expressionish block - do, BEGIN, INIT, sub (sort of),
the old eval which is now gone, or a user-defined one. I simply picked on
do {} and BEGIN {} because they were the examples given in the Apocalypse.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
}
or even:
given $x {
warn("Odd value") if !/xxx/; # Since $_ is the localizer
warn("No value") when undef;
when /aaa/ { break if 1; ... }
when /bbb/ { break if 2; ... }
when /ccc/ { break if 3; ... }
}
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
'-> $x' construct.
loop my $x=0; $x < 100; $x++ {
...
}
?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ired, will the expressions lose or
retain their own scope level? (I'm assuming that whatever rule applies, it
will hold true if you do elect to use parantheses anyway.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and Perl 6 is expected
to add more. Why not continue in that direction here, instead of veering
off in some strange direction.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have
been. ;-)
A quick glance through with tired eyes looked good, but I'll do a more
thorough paper trace when a little more coherent. (At least I was able to
mostly understand what you were doing.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> So, with those requirements and what knowledge of Perl 6 I have, I
> present a preliminary Exporter. I typed it directly into the mailer, so
> there's a good chance of mistakes. If anyone spots any mistakes in it,
> let me know.
Well, I can't get it to run :-)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
alid character identifiers." ?
Hmm. It looks like he didn't. That must have been a point someone had made
in a subsequent posting. I apologize.
>
> > IIRC, '^' was considered earlier. (And it's shifted, BTW.)
>
> 3) What do you mean by shifted?
A caret on a standard US qwerty keyboard is "shift-6'. (In reponse to your
complaint (a), about the underscore requiring the shift key.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hin a character class.
>
> Then I thought of it. In school whenever I separated a single word
> into two words my paper would come back with a small red arch joining
> the two words together into one. Of course that symbol was usually
> followed by a -5 or something like that. So I scanned the keyboard for
> something that looked like that small arch. Then I found it. The "^"
> symbol. Since I have a problem with the hyper operator idea, Maybe it
> could be used here. But what about xor. I can honestly say I have
> never used "^" to mean xor. The Huffman coded concept should make the
> use of xor rather than "^" a viable alternative. I read through
> Apocolypse3 and saw this justification:
IIRC, '^' was considered earlier. (And it's shifted, BTW.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
er recover...
how depressing.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ss considered? Personally, I
test for both, particularly within the context of defaulting. Of course,
you could still write:
$a = ($a // $b) || $b;
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t; through a loop) there's two important differences.
A particular case of, or independent from, co-routines' yield()?
> In fact, I'd go so far as to say junk the current meaning of the &
> prototype, which has never really lived up to it's promises, ...
Bingo.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
t rolls would be useful :)
Vuja de.
>
> Are there going to be string ops as well, or would add and mul work on
> string registers?
Yes.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
so often traditionally provided in a language, since it
identifies the proper quadrant.
Others would include abs, floor, ceil, round, mod - don't know if those are
basic or "fancy" to you. I suspect you may have those already
The question arises what do you do as its opcode,
, @ary;
>
> so :
> my $select = join (qq{} => ''), @ary;
That's not really joining.
>
> or is better to stay like this :
> my $select;
> map { $select .= qq{$_} } @ary;
Definitely.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday 07 September 2001 12:56 am, Ken Fox wrote:
> "Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
> > Generically speaking, modules aren't going to be running amok and making
> > a mess of your current lexical scope - they'll be introducing, possibily
> > repointing, an
ng in terms of pads, and missed
the extra pointer. You were correct... Forget what you just
unremembered
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ce to the
variable it represents? Okay, I'll buy that for now.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think I would expect behavior (c), but it's not obvious to me.
>
> I would have said (c) as well.
>
> And if I can figure it out... it ain't that tricky.
%MY:: ain't no different than %main::, except its contents are heaviliy
restricted to the current scope level. Whatever you used to be able to do
with globals, you'll now be able to do with lexicals. You just lose the
globalness of it.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tainer contains 1. ($x = 1)
My $y container contains a ref to the $x container. ($x = 1, $y = \$x)
My $z container contain 2. ($x = 1, $y = \$x, $z = 2)
My $x container now contains a ref to the $z container.
($x = \$z, $y = \$x, $z = 2)
My $z container now contains 3.
($x = \$z, $y = \$x, $z = 3, or $$x = 3, $$y = \$z, $z = 3, or
$$x = 3, $$$y = 3, $z = 3)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
d to reduce action at a distance -
why would we want to create even more?
my $x = 100;
{
use some_pragma; # Introduces some $x
foo($x);
bar($x);
}
# The original pragma's scope has ended... why should we be using the
# same $x? We shouldn't. The $x was created in the inner scope, and
# we're back to ours
%MY:: access the pad, not the variable.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ex?
>
> I especially wanted to confirm whether delete %MY{'$x'} will delete the
> outer $x because the inner one isn't yet quite in scope.
The delete should be no-oppish, as the lexical variable doesn't exists yet
in the current lexical scope. If you want to mess with your parent's scope,
you have to mess with it directly, not indirectly.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
, then I'd
> speculate the output would be
>
> inner=51, middle=50, outer=50
Again, I though that %MY:: referred to my current scope, in which case the
delete doesn't do anything. That would make it 101, 100, 50.
Is my understanding incorrect?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
{
> use Localmodules.pm;
> local *{$_} foreach @PolluteList;
> Pollute();
> Carp("Inner Carp"); # goes to STDERR
frok();# We want this to print "outer carp"
>
> }
>
> Carp(); #prints "outer carp\n"
>
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ikely recite the pod and Camel explanations verbatim. Some of my
differentiations may seem pedantic. Thank you for your continuing patience
- if my madness were an object, there'd be a method to it.
As always, constructive criticism is welcome.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm is this such a good thing?
my $a = 0;
GORK: while( 1 ) {
print "Rin ";
GORK: if ( 1 ) {
print "Tin ";
goto GORK if $b ^= 1;
print "\n";
next GORK;
}
}
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 04 September 2001 10:10 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 08:59 PM 9/4/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >Yes, this is akin to redeclaring every lexical variable every time you
> >introduce a new scope. Not pretty, I know. But if you want run-time
> >semant
On Tuesday 04 September 2001 09:09 pm, Damian Conway wrote:
> A C is a statement, just as an C or a C is a statement.
Okay, then I simply need to rethink/redefine how I'm defining a statement,
(which is currently in terms of the statement separator).
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e a brief glimpse before pursuing the global. If there are some, then it
would have to scan for itself, and use whatever was appropriate.
It's ugly but quick... er.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e things get tricky. Though I suppose we could
> put some sort of placeholder with auto-backsearch capabilities. Or
> something.
Other than the obvious run-time requirements of this, what's wrong with
simply looking in the current pad, seeing it's not there, then looking in
the pre
mislabelled
clauses. Like if blocks and while blocks.
>
> Using C would (presumably) cause control to head up-scope
> to the first *enclosing* block labelled 'BAR'.
But wasn't a bare 'next' supposed to continue on to the next statement?
given ( expr ) {
when /a/ : { foo; next }
when /b/ : { bar }
}
If /a/ is true, do foo(), and then continue on to the next statement.
If that was/is still the case, then wouldn't a 'next LABEL' imply continuing
on to the next statement labelled LABEL?
Of course, if it is no longer 'next', then that's fine, too. We want things
to be consistently different.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> This is possible now:
>
> $foo = sub ($) { print "hello world\n" };
> print prototype $foo;
Well, it's nice to know that when I reinvent the wheel, it's still round.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
expr : { block }' clause as
when ( expr ) { block }
?
'if', 'unless', 'elsif', 'given', 'while', 'until', the looping 'for[each]',
and potentially the 'catch' clauses all use that form - 'keyword ( expr ) {
block }'. 'when' is the odd man out.
Secondly, do 'when' clauses have targettable labels?
given ( $a ) {
when /a/ : { foo($a); next BAR }
when /b/ : { ... }
BAR: when /c/ : { ... }
...
}
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 03 September 2001 11:56 pm, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> The third value is a "peek" value. Do the runtime checking, but don't do
> any magic variable stuff. As a matter of fact, don't run any user-code at
> all. Simply return a true or false value i
er that sub is not-prototyped, prototyped
exactly the same, or prototyped differently. Multiple dispatch on functions
could alter our approach to the third. Direct calls have already been
attested to at compile time. The call has just changed...
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 03 September 2001 10:46 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:32 PM 9/3/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >On Monday 03 September 2001 10:27 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > >To me, that seems only a language decision. This could certainly
> > > > handle tha
difference there.
A single PMC? (A list of pointers to PMCs?)
Or, to think of it another way, how are you going to pass two scalars, or an
array of two scalars, to a sub with *no* prototype?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
a couple of other prototype tricks that we'd have to work out...
Unseparated bare code blocks for (&) prototypes come to mind.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
' aren't. They set the value to 'undef' or the value you
pass in. (Perhaps it'd be easier to think of it as 'our $a =
$__PACKAGE__::a')
In either case, that means an assignment is ultimately involved.
Assignments are handled right-to-left, so I think the scope declarators
should be too. (Once all the other problems are fixed.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
trary, so I
may add them back in. (The may not do anything, but they'll be there. Much
like the prototypes for it.)
>
> So we should have:
> 22. sub [ ( prototype ) ] [ :value_properties ] { block }
> 22. sub [ ( prototype ) ] { block } [ :value_properties ] # Or
> better?
The first, as it's more consistent with # 21.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 02 September 2001 07:49 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > Are prototypes going to be checked at runtime now?
>
> For methods, at least. Dunno about subs, that's Larry's call. I could make
> a good language case for and
ion..
Umm, it's simpler than that.
iterator (list) {
code;
}
# <- If you are here, you just completed your last iteration.
# (Unless you goto'd somewhere else, obviously. But that would
# skip the callback, too.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 02 September 2001 08:18 pm, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 07:47:37PM -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > Are prototypes going to be checked at runtime now?
> >
> > The following parses, but doesn't do anything, including warn.
>
Are prototypes going to be checked at runtime now?
The following parses, but doesn't do anything, including warn.
my $a = sub ($) { print };
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e same behavior currently happens within an eval
block. If you were to define 'return;', you'd have to also redress eval
behavior.
Does anyone wish to argue for any other behavior, or may we consider this
revisited?
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/perl5-porters@perl.org/msg12899.html
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> print $# if $#.last(); <--- print the index on the first iteration
I don't know if (and if so, how) you would see if you were on the last
iteration. (And would that be last, as in the very last argument passed in,
or last, as in you're not going to iterate again?)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s themselves aren't really
expressions although they take them. If they were, then
'expr if expr while expr' would be legal.
>
> also perl has statement separators, not terminators. with that
> definition you don't need to mention block close or EOF.
I never really thought about it that way. Excellent point. I shall make
that change.
>
> BCW> Flow Control Expressions
>
> BCW> A. goto
> BCW> B.
>
> B. was intentionally left blank.
I got tired. :-)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
. An expression which uses a block.
2. A specialized form of 5.
3. A specialized form of 7.
4. 'for' and 'foreach' are synonymous.
5. 'when' is only a valid construct when directly within a 'given'
construct.
6. Subroutines are covered in depth in a separate document.
7. An anonymous subroutine is technically an expression.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
like foo != bar
> > is the same as (foo > bar || foo < bar).
> >
> > It might prove convenient to express the expression.
>
> It's the same number of characters. How can it be more convenient?
You only have to manipulate the shift key once! ;-)
I'm waiting for someone to say that in tri-state logic, '!<' != '>='
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rbitrarily named
pseudohandles. But there's probably no reason that $*CODE couldn't
specifically refer to the entire file.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
d bytecode), the appropriate
static configuration info from the perl that compiled a particular unit may
be nice, although most likely unnecessary. Although, with the exception of
endianess and native extensions, the bytecode is supposed to be the same.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Friday 31 August 2001 01:13 am, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 12:45:03AM -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > Access to the source code.
>
> Already got that.
Not if we don't have the source. Or perhaps this will be the way we do it.
Dunno. Perl By
server, far from the source
code I didn't deploy with the compiled exectuables. This would more or less
be how a remote debug would have to work anyway.
Compilation time. For each of my compilation units, I would like to know
when it was compiled. Compilation unit scoped.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
';
}
print $b, "\n";# a
$c = 'a';
{
my $c = 'f';
$c .= 'b', $c .= 'c' if our $c .= 'd', $c .= 'e';
}
print $c, "\n"; # ade
I'm sure this makes absolute sense under-the-hood, and it is documented
(sort of) to behave this way, but isn't it a tad too inconsistent, even for
Perl? (Particularly 'my' vs 'our'. 'local' makes sense with its current
behavior, but I'd personally rather it were consistent, too.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e a single default
expression, multiple default expressions, or a default block?
[ LABEL: ] given ( expr_1 ) {
...
expr_n [;]
}
[ LABEL: ] given ( expr_1 ) {
...
expr_n
[; expr_n+1 ... ] [;]
}
[ LABEL: ] given ( expr_1 ) {
...
block
}
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wouldn't be
bad, except that there is a distinction between variables and the values
they contain.
For "out of band" data, properties sure have a strong affect on things.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday 02 August 2001 08:47 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 06:57 PM 8/2/2001 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >Here's how I'm documenting it. Corrections requested.
> >
> >Properties are by Perl thingy. (scalar, array, hash, reference, blessed
> >refe
r indices), but would allow the internal values to be
changed.
Today, I don't particularly care anymore.
In any case, properties will be pushed to the bottom of my stack for things
to document. There's a lot of Perl 6 contending for the bottom position, it
seems.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
n traditional get_ and set_ methods?
Properties interract with (potentially dynamic attributes), while member
functions do the real work.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
legal? An error?
# (The chomp character is defined by the IRS attribute of a filehandle.)
# Can I define something that says to chomp the values entered
# into the hash? The keys?
# What if the hash is tied to a filehandle?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ping ease, and -> isn't that
> > hard to type. That's what editor macros are for.
>
> What about replacing "->" with "/" ?
Your idea aside, I think the substitution was more to gain the '.' than to
replace the '->'.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(migrated from perl-qa)
On Wednesday 01 August 2001 03:10 pm, David L. Nicol wrote:
> "Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
> > I didn't have a good solution for tables, mainly because I didn't like a
> > tab, comma, or pipe separated solution. (Which isn't intended
On Monday 30 July 2001 07:29 am, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2001 19:36:43 -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >$x = ($default,$a,$b)[$b<=>$a]; # Much like I did before
>
> Note that
>
> $x = cond? a : b
>
> does lazy evaluation, i.e. the value fo
On Monday 30 July 2001 05:37 am, Me wrote:
> In a nutshell, you are viewing:
>
> foo if bar;
>
> as two statements rather than one, right?
>
Yep. The 5.7 docs explain it rather well, I think. Too bad I didn't read
them until *after* I had posted and taken off
).
Although I now understand what it does, I'm still fuzzy on the why and how.
Can someone in the know give a clear enough explanation that I can document?
The rest of you can debate whether or not this behavior should change for
Perl 6.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
methods) I
can think of are:
$x = ($default,$a,$b)[$b<=>$a]; # Much like I did before
($x) = sort { $a <=> $b or $default } ($a,$b);
# Since <=> and cmp were created more-or-less specifically for sort
The former is faster than the latter, but neither are as quick as the more
c
ery = qq{ SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE field $c[$cond] $x };
print "$query\n";
}
Even less to type. Maybe not all *that* clear, but no less than ?:, ?::,
and ?:?: all meaning different things.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hat
they are.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Saturday 02 June 2001 11:21 am, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> On Friday 01 June 2001 11:06 pm, David L. Nicol wrote:
> > having wantarray return the number of items needed, or -1 for
> > all of them, would work very nicely for user-written partial returners.
> >
> > Did
vice -1 for all items.)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e perl 6.0;
use >= perl 6.0; # or use perl >= 6.0?
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 15 May 2001 21:17, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 09:11:21PM -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > What? You didn't test it before you posted it? For shame! ;-)
>
> Bah. Damian and I are working on ways of prototyping the Perl 6
> interpreter in
? You didn't test it before you posted it? For shame! ;-)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
C, with thousands of
> typedefs representing basic types ("LPSTR" and "HWND" come to mind as the
> most common).
Not mention the hoop-jumping required to keep variable names in sync with
code changes. (signed-ness, short->int->long, etc)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
= ( foo => 1, bar => '=>', baz => 1 )
Or it could be
%foo = ( foo => 1, bar => 1, '=>' => 'baz' )
But I like the concept of a quote hash.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(missing operator)
>
> beautiful. Then extending this is simple, consistent, easy to read,
> compatible with perl5..
I'm not sure that that was the point I was trying to make.
If nothing else, the '.' would then be responsible for *three*
different actions.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pull double duty as a decimal point, as well.
'4.5' (4.5) vs '4 .5' (45) vs '4. 5' (missing operator)
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
d work for plain perl
> data structures as well, as we might potentially be doing a fair amount of
> data conversion through the variable vtable interface. (Not to mention the
> issues of data mangling for proper Unicode sorting support)
>
> Dan
>
> --"it's like this"---
> Dan Sugalski even samurai
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
> teddy bears get drunk
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tch every time.
> Of course, we may not be able to say that, in which case hints of any sort
> are a Good Thing.
Yes. One way or t'other.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hould the Perl cabal deem that, for Perl to improve, it *must* undergo
these radical changes, I will, to the best of my meager abilities, attempt
to implement them.
My position may seem a bit extreme - after all, didn't I, in the second
RFC, attempt to autoprint statements in a void context? I started in the
middle of the road, but as arguments like this have continued, I've moved
wy to the minimalist's side. Hey, overhaul Perl to your heart's
content so that you're able to do x, y, and z; just so long as Perl itself
doesn't do x, y, and z.
--
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 20 February 2001 16:03, John Porter wrote:
> Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >
> > And there's a difference between warnings originating because something
has
> > gone wrong and those originating because I'm doing something
particularly
> > per
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
