On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:04:32PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: No, Ucfirst it can't be, I think. And ALLCAPS is ugly. @ is taken (and
: ugly). Suggestions?
Maybe we could define an "ok" operator that suppresses only the
*first* warning produced by its argument(s). Then if you get multiple
warnings, you
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:45:16AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: Among the various ways of declaring variables, will Perl 6 have a way to
: say, "this variable is highly temporary, and may be re-declared within
: the same scope, or in a nested scope without concern"? I often find
: myself doing:
:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 12:45:14PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > Well, only if you stick to a standard dialect. As soon as you start
: > defining your own macros, it gets a little trickier.
:
: Interesting, I hadn't considered that.
:
: Having a quick browse thro
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 03:11:59AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: Error handling is simple, a failed chdir returns undef and sets errno.
:
: $CWD = $dir err die "Can't chdir to $dir: $!";
Offhand, I guess my main semantic problem with it is that if a chdir
fails, you aren't in an undefin
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 07:29:43PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: So, what's the important downside of all this?
The fact that smartmatching a list doesn't slice, but is defined to
be array equality with smartmatch of each element in order:
if @array ~~ (1,2,3,"many") { say "array can count" }
Larry
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:08:21AM -0600, John Williams wrote:
: Good point. Another one is: how does the meta_operator determine the
: "identity value" for user-defined operators?
:
: (1,2,3,4,5) >>my_infix_op<< (3,2,4)
:
: Maybe we should say that the excess length is simply copied unchang
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 06:58:29PM +0300, Yuval Kogman wrote:
:
: We blitzed a discussion on #perl 3 minutes ago, reaching the
: conclusion that negated subscripts are cool.
:
: So i was thinking:
:
: subscripts are objects.
I'm all in favor of powerful constructs, but we need to be *really*
ca
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 01:25:15PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
(B: Juerd wrote:
(B: >>According to Wikipedia there are around 400 million native English
(B: >>speakers and 600 million people who have English as a second language.
(B: >>Should the remaining ~5.5 billion humans be exluded from wri
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(
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 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 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 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 Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 02:43:55PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
: On Wed, Apr 06, 2005, Larry Wall wrote:
: > I think it's time to break out
: > the colon again and use something like:
: >
: > &infix:<+>:(Complex, Complex);
: >
: > or
: >
: >
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, do you
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 07:22:48PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: HaloO Larry,
:
: you wrote:
: >for ordinary functions. If it gets really popular people might
: >even start writing:
: >
: >sub foo :(Str,Int) {...}
:
: I like it, but that could mean it will not become popular :))
: And this
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 06:50:11PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Juerd wrote:
: >And will Perl 6 reference values rather than their containers, that is:
: >will \$foo differ when $foo gets a new value, just as in Python id(foo)
: >changes after foo += 1?
:
: Depends on the definition of the seman
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 10:07:33AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Thomas Sandlaß writes:
: > Larry Wall wrote:
: > >Yes. It should complain that = is not a valid type signature.
: > >Any &foo (or &foo:<...>) followed by <...> should be parsed as a single
: >
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 04:31:08PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >Yes. It should complain that = is not a valid type signature.
: >Any &foo (or &foo:<...>) followed by <...> should be parsed as a single
: >term selecting the function that MMD
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 06:38:43PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Ups, a missing : warps this to a completly different meaning!
: Comparing a coderef &infix with the comparison operator <=>
: to the word list 'Scalar of Ref of Ref of Int,Int'.
:
: I tried to ask what &infix:<=>
: does. This is the
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 07:31:40PM +0300, wolverian wrote:
: Does [EMAIL PROTECTED] DWIM, by the way? I'm not sure about the precedence.
That depends on whether you mean
([EMAIL PROTECTED]).words
or
~(@array.words)
It happens to mean the latter. A . binds tighter than a symbolic
unary
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:36:18AM +0300, wolverian wrote:
: (Replying to p6l instead of p6c as requested.)
:
: On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:39:16AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > (Now that builtins are just functions out in * space, we can probably
: > afford to throw a few more conve
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 02:38:05PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: Hi,
:
: Trey Harris wrote:
: > In a message dated Mon, 4 Apr 2005, Ingo Blechschmidt writes:
: >> What does pick return on hashes? Does it return a random value or a
: >> random pair? (I suppose returning a pair is more useful.)
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 04:00:09PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >Roles cannot be derived from, so they're always final in that sense.
: >We should probably consider them closed by default as well, or at least
: >closed after first use. If a role specifies
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:34:13PM -0400, Andrew Rodland wrote:
: On Monday 04 April 2005 06:34 pm, Juerd wrote:
: > Terrence Brannon skribis 2005-04-04 18:45 (+):
: > > So, to avoid confusion with the common understanding of flattening in
: > > Perl, perhaps it should be called spreading or di
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 05:40:10PM +, Terrence Brannon wrote:
:
: A Perl 5 user thinks of flattening a data structure as taking
: something which is nested and "linearizing" it.
:
: FOR EXAMPLE:
:
: use Data::Hash::Flatten;
:
: # NESTED DATA
: my $a = { bill => { '5/27/96' => { 'a.dat'
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:55:23PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: but if you use vim or emacs inside a terminal, you'll want to make sure
: it's in iso-latin-1 mode (e.g. in gnome-terminal, you have to use the
: menu: "Terminal->Set Character Encoding")
If you going to that trouble, at least try yo
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 11:27:09PM +0300, wolverian wrote:
: On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:31:53PM +0100, Juerd wrote:
: > In fact, won't things be much easier if shift and pop workend on strings
: > as well as on arrays? Now that we have multis, this should be easy to
: > do.
:
: How about defining
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 10:20:28AM +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
: How should this stuff be expressed? 'use less' is cute, but i don't
: think it really gets there.
It's mostly there as a placeholder for all the "true pragmas" that
can be ignored if you don't understand them, an idea I originally
sto
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 03:03:09PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 02:37:24PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: >: How can you have a level independent position?
: >
: >By not confusing positions with numbers. They're just pointers into
: >
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 01:11:37PM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: If you declare a variable to be of a type (let's even say a class to be
: specific), then you have hinted to the compiler as to the nature of that
: variable, but nothing is certain.
:
: That is to say that the compiler cannot:
:
:
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 03:19:33PM +0800, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Luke Palmer wrote:
: >>Supposing I had a "doc" trait, could I say:
: >> sub f2c (Num $temp doc)
: >> doc
: >> {...}
: >>Or would I be forced to spell it doc('stuff') ?
: >Well, first you need an `is` somewhere in there. And
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 11:22:43AM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >: On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 23:46 -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
: >:
: >: In P6, an object is a data-type. It's not a reference, and any member
: >: payload is attached d
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 11:06:01AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Is your view of the world like Python or like Perl 5?
Them's fightin' words. :-)
: Values have no identity in Perl 5.
That's slightly not true, insofar as Perl 5 distinguishes hash keys
by value (albeit filtered through stringification).
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 01:49:24AM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
: I've included assignment forms of all operators in the exponentiation,
: multiplicative, additive, junctive, and tight logical levels; this may
: be overkill or underkill. I've not included hyper forms of these
: operators,
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 08:39:52AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: I'm pretty sure that =:= does what you want. If you have two scalar
: references, you might have to spell it like this:
:
: $$x =:= $$y
Unnecessary, I think. I want
$x =:= @y
to tell me whether the reference in $x is to th
: On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 23:46 -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 08:04:22AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
:
: > What I want to be able to do is compare two references to see if they
: > point to the same thing, in this case an object, but in other cases
: > perhaps some other type
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 11:46:22PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
: So, what is the operator for reference comparison?
The =:= operator is almost certainly what you want here.
Larry
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 06:35:06PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Is typing optional in the sense that it is no syntax error but
: otherwise ignored? To me this is pain but no gain :(
Well, you guys keep ignoring the answer. Let me put it a bit more
mathematically. The information in
my X $
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 12:05:12PM +0200, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: If I understand you correctly the use statement is more like a
: linker/loader directive than a compile time interface include?
That is up to the module being used. "use" is a linker, but it's
only required to link enough informati
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:40:26AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: There _is_ a way to do it, actually, but we need to really screw around
: with what kinds of things are inferred. In the case:
:
: my $a;
: $a.m(1);
:
: We assign the type "objects with an 'm' method that can take a single
:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
(B: Luke Palmer skribis 2005-03-29 6:14 (-0700):
(B: > method iterate () {
(B: > for (@.objs) {
(B: > .process($_); # oops
(B: > }
(B: > }
(B:
(B: There is an alarming similarity with
(B:
(B:
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 01:30:14PM -0700, Craig DeForest wrote:
: Yow -- units would be extra cool for perl6: I know of no other language that
: has units support built in. It would go a long way toward making perl6 the
: language of choice for students in the physical sciences...
Well, yes. I
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 03:40:14PM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: Now you can ask for whatever you like:
:
: say "We have {â.new $money}â"
:
: Though you might have some snazzy way of saying that.
Just by the by, that's illegal syntax. Methods with arguments
require parens. You could, how
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 11:53:07AM -0500, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: According to Larry Wall:
: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 07:38:10PM -, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: > : And might I also ask why in Perl 6 (if not Parrot) there seems to be
: > : no type support for strings with known encodi
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 11:57:48PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
: >>>>> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: LW> That being said, in Perl 5, if you say
:
: LW> @a = undef;
:
: LW> you don't get an undefined array. I'd
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 12:04:39AM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
: >>>>> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: LW> As I mentioned in my other message, I think we should not assume that
: LW> Perl 6 works the same in this regard as Perl 5 does. T
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:21:18PM +0100, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >That's actually weirdly symmetrical with the notion that only subs can
: >impose compile-time context on their arguments, while methods always
: >have to assume list context because you have t
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 03:38:38PM +0800, song10 wrote:
: hi, all
:
: is there any way to import constants from other modules without
: specifying scope everytime?
: such like this:
:
: module A;
: use constant { PI => 3.14, VER => 1.1 }
: ...
:
:
:
: module B;
: my $var = A::PI; # this wa
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 07:38:10PM -, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: Would this be a good time to ask for explanation for C being
: never Unicode, while C is always Unicode, thus leading to an
: inability to box a non-Unicode string?
As Rod said, "str" is just a way of declaring a byte buffer, for w
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 02:37:24PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
:
: >%+ and %- are gone. $0, $1, $2, etc. are all objects that know
: >where they .start and .end. (Mind you, those methods return magical
: >positions that are Unicode level independent.)
: >
: How ca
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 03:13:07AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Chip Salzenberg writes:
: > I'm working on enhancing Perl6::Subs[*] to support more parameter
: > traits than just C. I have some questions about
: > parameters and traits. (These questions all apply to pure Perl 6,
: > which I know I
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 03:45:30PM -0500, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: According to Rod Adams:
: > Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: > >* As far as I can tell, the choice of spelling an array parameter
: > > C or C is entirely cosmetic: both @a and
: > > $a are capable of holding an Array reference. Is there
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 11:31:07AM +0100, Juerd wrote:
: Perhaps good administration would be to introduce a generic Deprecated::
: namespace. Module authors can move their own old modules there if they
: want, and there can be Deprecated::P5 for stuff like dbmopen,
: Deprecated::Perl5::File::Find.
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 09:59:10AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: On Sat, 2005-03-26 at 00:27 -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: > $$ is now $*PID. ($$foo is now unambuous.)
: >
: > $0 is gone in favor of $*PROGRAM_NAME or some such.
:
: You know, Java did one thing in this respect that I l
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 03:37:41AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: > $! will be a legal variable name. $/ is going away,
:
: By which you mean that $/ is turning into a special $0.
I'd say that $0 is a specialization of $/, but yes, basically, they
both represent the current match result, albeit di
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 06:49:58PM +1100, Adam Kennedy wrote:
: >Er, I'm not sure you will want to--I'm using PPI's evil twin brother,
: >"PPD" (the actual Perl parser). I've just modified it so it doesn't
: >forget anything I want it to remember. (As you know, the standard
: >parser throws away
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 02:11:29PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 10:03:45PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > Hmm, well, if it got that far. Given strict being on by default,
: > this particular example should probably just die on the fact that $"
: > isn
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 12:05:06PM +1100, Andrew Savige wrote:
: I noticed the Pugs folks have started porting File::Spec and
: other modules to Pugs, which leads me to ask this question.
: I've also taken a look at Rod Adams S29.
:
: There a quite a few p5 standard libraries with crusty old user
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 10:27:53PM +1100, Adam Kennedy wrote:
: Also, I saw another mention recently (possibly on TPF request for
: donations) about the Perl 5 to Perl 6 converter, and it being 40%
: completed? ... Larry?
Well, by one reckoning it's 0% done. At the moment I'm just working
on a
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 06:58:51PM +0100, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >my @array of Int;
: >
: >is really short for
: >
: >my @array is Array of Int;
:
: How does 'is' relate to 'does'? I mean is the above @array
: ready for operation?
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 05:18:44PM +0100, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Rod Adams wrote:
: > multi sub postcircumflex::<[ ]>(MyArray $obj : [EMAIL PROTECTED]) is rw
{...}
: >
: >but I'll wait for S14 before speculating further.
:
: Will that ever be written? And if yes, will it be like S13 which
: is b
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:09:37PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: > Step A: For each positional parameter, if the next supplied argument is:
: >
: > 1) a non-pair
: > 2) a pair, and this parameter is explicitly declared Pair, or
: > 3) a hash, and th
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 12:58:32PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: Note, the adverbial :{...} is defined as a named binding to the first
: *& parameter (or first *$ parameter if there isn't a slurpy *&), so
: it's already bound by Step C, even if it occurred later syntactically.
Hmm
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:08:17PM +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
: On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:53:06 -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > This seems a little backwards--I think all positionals should be bound
: > before you start binding named pairs, if currying is to be consistent with
: > "ord
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:24:48PM +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
: On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 17:43:52 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
: > Hola... I've spend some time these last few days slowly getting
: > currying to work in pugs.
:
: It should also be mentioned that I made magical $?SUB et al unbind
: the
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 05:43:52PM +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
: The algorithmic approach to binding some params:
:
: bind invocants
:
: bind named parameters, and keep leftover pairs for %_
:
: treat nonpairs as positionals, and bind them sequentially. Left
: over nonpair
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 07:33:43PM +0100, Thomas Sandlaß wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >So we should probably
: >have a generalized radix_to_dec($radix,$input) function out there
: >somewhere instead.
:
: Why not shift it onto the type system:
:
: my Int $i = $input as Str[$radix] as In
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:14:16AM -0500, Stevan Little wrote:
: Is subst an object/type?
: Or is it a method of the Str object?
I suspect it's just a method, and the ~~ binding of s/// is merely
syntactic sugar for the method call.
: If it is an object ...
:
: Does s/// produce a su
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:28:31PM +, Peter Haworth wrote:
: On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:41:27 -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > Okay, I've come around to liking it, but I think we have to say that
: > 0x, 0d, 0o, 0b, and whatever else we come up with are just setting
: > the default radi
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 09:08:08PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Does Perl need a no-op function?
:
: With the addition of "no bare literals", it makes constructs like
:
: 1 while some_func();
:
: an error.
Well, it's not a bareword--it's just potentially a useless use of
the value in a void contex
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 10:33:04PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: I'm thinking C and C should be strictly Code Point level
: activities, but I'm not sure.
Alternately, since Num implies arbitrary precision, we *could* define
a value that can hold as many code points as you like, mod 2**32 or some
such
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 05:27:56PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: I believe Perl 6 hasn't changed its policy on labels, so you should be
: able to write that in Perl 6. But your behavior might be undefined.
: It's weird to jump into the middle of a loop. We may only allow you to
: jump outwards from
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 08:54:54PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote: Okay,
I've come around to liking it, but I think we have to say that 0x,
0d, 0o, 0b, and whatever else we come up with are just setting the
default radix. If a string comes in with an explicit 0x, 0d, 0o,
or 0b, we believe that in preferen
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 05:07:49PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: I propose that we make a few decisions about strings in Perl. I've read
: all the synopses, several list threads on the topic, and a few web
: guides to Unicode. I've also thought a lot about how to cleanly define
: all the string related
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 09:36:49PM -0500, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: Nobody on #perl6 today could answer this one. Is:
: Str | Int where { $_ }
: the same as:
: (Str | Int) where { $_ }
: or:
: Str | (Int where { $_ })
: ?
"where" binds looser than |, but it's a member of a select group
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 03:59:43PM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What it doesn't solve is the $.method vs .method issue. They look similar
: but one works on the invocant and one works on $_. Still a trap.
Yes, and that's probably the killer of the "oc" idea. So much for
Sleep Brain, heh, h
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:00:32PM -0500, John Macdonald wrote:
: Generally when I do this I am not only deleting the character
: from the string, but also moving it to another scaler to use;
: so substr isn't a simple replacement because you'd have to
: use it twice.
Well, not lately. There's
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:21:07AM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
: On 3/18/05 12:18 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
: > Autochomping is one of the motivations for switching from "while" to
: > "for" for the normal line input method, since "while" might think a
: > blan
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 05:01:50AM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: I'll try to come up with something decent, if no one beats me to it.
: Sadly, the C style hex2int, oct2int might be the least confusing, but
: heinously ugly.
Yes, though there are two difficulties right there in the names:
hardwiring
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 10:28:18AM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: Thus:
:
: eval read :file("foo");
:
: There you have it.
The problem being that it will now report errors in some random
temporary string rather than at some line number in a file. Not good.
Orthogonality strikes again.
Lar
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 06:11:09PM -0500, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: =head2 Obsolete
:
: =item chop
:
: Chop removes the last character from a string. Is that no longer useful,
: or has chomp simply replaced its most common usage?
I expect chop still has its uses. Also, since $/ is
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:31:07PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Aaron Sherman wrote:
: >>Methods on numeric values (should be defined as pseudo-methods on
: >>unboxed numbers):
: >>
: >> chr
: >> hex
: >>oct
: >>
: >>
: >
: >Sigh... well, now I know what Ctrl-Return does in Evolution :-
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 11:02:47AM +0100, Juerd wrote:
: Rod Adams skribis 2005-03-16 23:16 (-0600):
: > Doesn't C go until the longest input is exhausted, returning undef
: > at the end of the shorter ones?
That's what has been specified.
: No, as that'd break the most common idiom it introduce
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 05:52:15PM +0100, Michele Dondi wrote:
: On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: >really short alias for $self. Suppose we pick "o" for that, short
: >for "object". Then we get self calls of the form:
: >
: > o.frobme(...)
:
: How
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 08:41:26AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: Then we get self calls of the form:
:
: o.frobme(...)
Sleep Brain would also like to point out that this lets you use o
standalone when you want to pass the current object as an ordinary
argument to some other class. Likewise for
I've been thinking about this in my sleep, and at the moment I think
I'd rather keep .foo meaning $_.foo, but break the automatic binding
of the invocant to $_. Instead of that, I'd like to see a really,
really short alias for $self. Suppose we pick "o" for that, short
for "object". Then we get
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 02:06:46AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: I'll just point out, the rest of this message, with all the autocopy
: complexity (according to /some/ people), uses this assumption. It all
: happily goes away if $self.:bar returns a list if @:bar is declared.
: And I can't, off hand
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:33:42AM +0200, Gaal Yahas wrote:
: I'm looking to understand symbol tables and the symtable hash better.
:
: What's the motivation for ::() syntax? Is it mainly for binding aliases?
It's for explicit symbolic reference. The ${...} syntax is now
entirely reserved for ha
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:00:08PM +1100, Adam Kennedy wrote:
: Personally, .foo meaning $self.foo seems more consistent to my mind, and
: I'd happily standardise on implicit invocants.
I'm thinking about it. There are definitely things to be said for both
sides, and maybe we can come up with a
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:49:12PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: I haven't gotten a solid answer on when and how Perl will autogenerate
: methods from subs.
In general I don't think of it as autogeneration at all, but as
failover to a different dispatcher. I can't think of a case where an
ordinary
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:10:40PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
: When I last asked a related question here, I was told that simply
: returning an attribute will allow the caller to modify the original
: attribute by default.
That used to be true for arrays and hashes, but I just changed my
mind
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 09:49:47PM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
: I need some clarification on the semantics of subroutine or method
: return statements, regarding whether copies or references are
: returned. It will help me in my p6ification of p5 code.
:
: Say I had a class with 3 private attr
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 02:55:21PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Of course, I now have to question the need for C. Other than
: linguistics, which is not to be dismissed, what difference is there between
:
:given $expr { ... }
:
: and
:
:for $expr { ... }
:
: with equivalent ...'s?
:
: hm
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 10:46:29PM +0100, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-03-16 9:41 (-0800):
: > Except that q:meta would be an upgrade in terms of specialness,
: > and besides, it's inside out from what you want, which is to quote
: > a particular argument to a string inte
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:48:27PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >Yes, and it distributes as any array return type declaration would.
: >
: >
: Does this mean that we can define multiple slurpuy arrays (and
: hashes?!?) in a parameter list, of different types, and Perl
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:22:06PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
:
: >On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:28:15PM -0700, Marcus Adair wrote:
: >: Isn't saying "false doesn't exist" like saying, "dark doesn't exist"?
: >: Why have a word for th
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:53:43AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Larry Wall writes:
: > Certainly. The zone markers are as orthogonal to sigils as we can
: > make 'em. Though I'm not sure we've given a meaning to *&foo yet.
: > I suppose that would have to mean that t
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 02:38:45AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 10:24:16AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 08:46:03PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: > : Is using wrap/call the correct choice here, or is there another way
: > : to do it that
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:41:56PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
: Luke Palmer wrote:
:
: >Marcus Adair writes:
: >> Additionally I question whether this is truly a case improving to the
: >> point of least surprise? After all, I don't know a programmer who's
: >> going to be surprised by what true m
1301 - 1400 of 2551 matches
Mail list logo
