On 22/06/07, brian d foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
===Per class documentation, not per file documentation
Related to the one above, I'd like to have NAME, SYNOPSIS, etc. for
each class, not just per file. Well, what I really want is the
Smalltalk class and method browsers, but I know I'm no
quoting mechanism that returns a parse
tree rather than a simple string if we want to deal with interpolating
complex values (especially if we don't want to have to worry about
what, if any, quotes are needed round some of our interpolated values.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
s
(and other tricksy class methods) to be found in the Ruby on Rails
framework...
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
list should only flatten
array arguments if there is only one array. And if it doesn't, how do
I declare parameter that is 'a slurpy list of arrays' or 'the rest
of the arguments, without flattening'. If I *really* want aggressive
flattening then I can call, say, @slurpy_param.flatten
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
;t be surprised :)
>
> Algebra, in general, is a specific form of calculus. So, we're
> speaking of the same thing, just in different terms.
Umm... I think you have that relationship the wrong way around.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
nt <<'EOQ'
I like witty sayings as much as the next guy, but wit can hurt when
misdirected. If people want me to be machine for cranking out quote
file fodder, I'll do my best. But I also care about my friends.
Larry
EOQ
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
fairly serious retooling of
the call stack if they are to work properly. And one shot continuations are the
next best thing to useless.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
of way that, unless my user truly intended to do so, he's not
> going to be able to accidentally screw up my internal state.
And when your user does want to, essentially say "Nah, you screwed up designing
that object protocol, children shouldn't've been protected." it's the
idea for named subs, if only for style.
>
> our &dosomething ::= -> $a, $b { $a blah $b }
>
> Not really a winner in any perspective.
And the return semantics of pointy blocks are different, you have to be careful
about doing an explicit return in them because th
Stevan Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers,
>
> On Oct 12, 2005, at 5:22 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> We definitely have two instances of A since, B.isa(::A). We also have
>> a fragile implementation of count.
>
> :)
>
> Sorry, I purposefully made it
Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> How about:
>>
>> my method SCALAR::attributes($self:) { $$self }
>> my method HASH::attributes(%self:) { %self.kv }
>> my method ARRAY::attributes(@self:
ur %.instance_count_of
method count (Class $c: ?$with_descendents = undef) {
my @interesting_classes = $c;
if $with_descendents {
push @interesting_classes, *($c.all_subclasses);
}
[+] %.instance_count_of(@interesting_classes)
}
method BUILD {
%.instance_count_of($?SELF.class)
}
}
Where we're assuming that a class can find all its subclasses
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
hod _attributes($attrs) {
my @attributes = $attrs.attributes
return @attributes[0] if @attributes == 1;
...
}
Assuming it's legal.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
"Peter Haworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:24:47 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 16:57:51 +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
>> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:17:05 +0200, TSa wrote:
>> > > Piers Cawley wrote:
TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, I would call *intentional* exceptions terrorism.
So that would be all exceptions then. They all get implemented somewhere, even
the ones that get thrown by builtins.
CATCH Exception { say "Why do you hate freedom?" }
--
Piers Cawle
ter productive
> hairsplitting?
Just a reference to the old philosophical question of how many angels can dance
on the head of a pin. That and the fact that I occasionally get curmudgeonly
and hit the send button before I have second thoughts.
The weird thing is that the syntax I rolled there is soon to be the topic of an
original thread, once I've got the thing written up a little more.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> HaloO,
>
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>>>Exactly which exception is continued?
>> The bottommost one. If you want to return to somewhere up its call chain, do:
>> $!.caller(n).continue(42)
>
> Whow, how does a higher level
("say foo()" above). So it's somewhere in between.
> Where?
Obviously the topmost function should do:
sub open(...) {
...
CATCH { $!.rethrow }
}
This assumes that 'rethrow' throws a new exception that delegates to the
original exception for lots of its
hey know in advance that C can succeed at most once (e.g. foo
> could really be C).
>
> Or another case is this:
>
> while (<>) {
> if (@buffer < MAX) {
> push @buffer, $_;
> next;
> }
> # ...
> shift @buffer;
> push @buffer, $_;
> }
while <> {
if 0..MAX { push @buffer, $_; next }
end
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 8/3/05, Aankhen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 8/3/05, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > So how *do* I pass an unflattened array to a function with a slurpy
>> > parameter?
>>
>> G
Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 03:40:34PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>> I dunno. I'm inclined to say that it should default to Item|Pair, and
>> let people say Any explicitly if they really want to suppress autothreading.
>> Otherwise conditionals and switches a
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 7/26/05, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> > I would like to be able to iterate over all the
>> > objects in the live set.
>>
>> My Idea actuall
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 7/26/05, Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> are the following assumptions correct?
>>
>> sub foo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) { @args[0] }
>>
>> say ~foo("a", "b", "c"); # "a"
>
> Yep.
>
>> my @array = ;
>> say ~foo(@array);
"TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Let's say I have a class, call it Foo which has a bunch of attributes, and
>> I've
>> created a few of them. Then, at runtime I do:
>>eval 'class Foo { has
Let's say I have a class, call it Foo which has a bunch of attributes, and I've
created a few of them. Then, at runtime I do:
eval 'class Foo { has $.a_new_attribute is :default<10> }';
Assuming I've got the syntax right for defaulting an attribute, and lets assume
I have, the Perl runtime nee
Sam Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Larry Wall wrote:
> > > Users of the class includes people subclassing the class, so to them
> > > they need to be able to use $.month_0 and $.month, even though there
> > > is no "has $.month_0" declared in the Class implementation, only
> > > "has $.m
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 08:48:41PM +0300, Gaal Yahas wrote:
> : I propose to throw away the filesystem coupling, and map from a more
> : general name of the bit of code we are requiring to a more general
> : description of which instance of it we actually g
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:47:47PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> : Or you could use a global, but globals are bad...
>
> Globals are bad only if you use them to hold non-global values.
> In this case it seems as though you're just
So, I got to thinking about stuff. One of the more annoying things about
writing nicely decoupled objects and applications are those occasions where you
want an object to be able to create objects in another class. Say you've
provided a singleton interface to your logging system. The naive implemen
Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 13:42:34 +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
>> Yuval Kogman wrote:
>> >As I understand it SMD is now not much more than a mechanism to
>> >place a constraint on the MMD, saying that there can only be one
>> >method or subroutine with the sam
BÁRTHÁZI András <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering, if it's possible with Perl 6 or not?
>
> class MyClass {
>
> method mymethod($par) {
> say "mymethod called!";
> }
>
> }
>
> class ExClass is MyClass {
>
> mymethod(12);
>
> }
>
> #> pugs myprog
>
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/20/05, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 12:11 +0200, Juerd wrote:
>>
>> > I think there exists an even simpler way to avoid any mess involved.
>> > Instead of letting AUTOLOAD receive and pass on arguments, and instead
>>
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As I've said before, Perl supports `alias`--it's just spelled `:=`.
Here's a rubyish idiom:
my &old_behaviour := &function;
&function := sub { try_some_stuff || &old_behaviour }
Except, with binding it doesn't work like that, you end up
Carl Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> sub factorial (Int $n is topic) {
>> return 1 when 0;
>> return $n * factorial $n;
>> }
>
> hmm, could we write...
>
> sub foo (Class $self is topic: +$foo, +$bar) {
> .method;
> }
>
> to avoid having to use ./
> ?
Yay!
Suppose I have a simple, single argument recursive function:
sub factorial (Int $n) {
return 1 if $n == 0;
return $n * factorial $n;
}
Can I write that as:
sub factorial (Int $n:) {
return 1 when 0;
return $n * factorial $n;
}
NB. Yes, I know it's a pathological example.
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/16/05, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So, I was about to write the following test for Pugs:
>>
>> sub factorial (Int $n) {
>> my sub factn (Int $acc, $i) {
>> return $ac
So, I was about to write the following test for Pugs:
sub factorial (Int $n) {
my sub factn (Int $acc, $i) {
return $acc if $i > $n;
factn( $acc * $i, $i+1);
}
factn(1, 1);
}
When I thought to check the apocalypses and exegeses and, what do you know, I
couldn't find an
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/14/05, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Following a conversation with Chip on IRC, is this
>>
>> my @y := @foo[0..][1];
>>
>> legal?
>
> Definitely not. But it sure would be nice if
Following a conversation with Chip on IRC, is this
my @y := @foo[0..][1];
legal?
Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>>Chip and I have been having a discussion. I want to write:
>>
>>sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
>>say foo()("$x");
>>
>>I claim that that s
Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Piers Cawley said:
>> in other words, some way of declaring that a subroutine wants to hang onto
>> every lexical it can see in its lexical stack, not matter what static
>> analysis
>> may say.
>
> I'm not
Chip and I have been having a discussion. I want to write:
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
say foo()("$x");
I claim that that should print 1. Chip claims it should throw a warning about
because of timely destruction. My claim is that a closure should close over the
So, the return in pointy sub thread got me thinking about useful uses of return
in pointy subs that involve being able to return multiple times. And this is
what I came up with, it's an implementation of 'choose':
my &give_up = sub { fail "Ran out of choices" }
sub choose ([EMAIL PROTECTE
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 10:51:34PM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
> : Yeah, that's pretty. But that will bite people who don't understand
> : continuations; it will bite people who don't understand "return"; it
> : will even bite people who understand continuat
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/8/05, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In other words, it outputs:
>> >
>> >Foo
>> >Foo
>> ># dies
>
> Yep. My mistake.
>
>> If that works, then I
"TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> [..] then I think it means we can write:
>> sub call-with-current-continuation(Code $code) {
>> my $cc = -> $retval { return $retval }
>
> For the records: the
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Piers Cawley wrote:
>>> My preference is for:
>>> Boo
>>> Boo
>>> Can't dereferene literal numeric litera
"TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> My preference is for:
>> Boo
>> Boo
>> Can't dereferene literal numeric literal 42 as a coderef.
>
> How do you reach the second 'Boo'? Iff ->
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/7/05, Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 6/7/05, Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > sub foo (Code $code) {
>> > my $return_to_caller = -> $ret { return $ret };
>> >
>> > $code($return_to_caller);
>> >
Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> sub foo (Code $code) {
> my $return_to_caller = -> $ret { return $ret };
>
> $code($return_to_caller);
> return 23;
> }
>
> sub bar (Code $return) { $return(42) }
>
> say foo &bar; # 42 or 23?
>
> I think
Stevan Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On May 25, 2005, at 5:39 AM, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> One of the 'mental apps' that's been pushing some of the things I've been
>> asking for in Perl 6's introspection system is a combined
>> refact
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 10:51, Luke Palmer wrote:
>
>> Except that mixins like this always treat things as "virtual".
>> Whenever you mixin a role at runtime, Perl creates an empty, anonymous
>> subclass of the current class and mixes the role in that cla
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 5/6/05, J Matisse Enzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've become scared that if Perl is to continue to be viable for large,
>> complex, multi-developer projects that the tools need to serious
>> catch-up with what is available for Java, for example. Th
David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I image we've all written logging code that looks something like this
> (Perl5 syntax):
>
> sub foo {
> my ($x,$y) = @_;
> note("Entering frobnitz(). params: '$x', '$y'");
> ...
> }
>
> This, of course, throws an 'uninitialized val
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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 wi
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 so unclear.
>
>> Can you tell me what your idea of a "scope" is? I'm thin
Darren Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 7:10 AM +0100 3/29/05, Piers Cawley wrote:
>>Doesn't that rather depend on the type of the attribute? Personally, if I get
>>an object back from accessor method then I expect that any modifications of
>>that object&#x
Darren Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 11:26 PM -0700 3/16/05, Luke Palmer wrote:
>> > For each of the above cases, is a copy of or a reference to the
>>> attribute returned? For each, will the calling code be able to
>>> modify $obj's attributes by modifying the return values, or not?
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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
Aldo Calpini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Larry Wall wrote:
>> I suppose if I were Archimedes I'd have climbed
>> back out and shouted "Eureka", but as far as I know Archimedes never
>> made it to Italy, so it didn't occur to me...
>
> well, Archimedes *was* italian. for some meaning of italian,
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 13:14, Larry Wall wrote:
>
>> So whereas Ruby's syntax actually tends to push you toward .each
>> iterators, Perl 6's syntax will be fairly neutral on the subject,
>> or maybe biased every so slightly away from method iteration by t
"Joe Gottman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In perl 6, the statement
>
> @foo = (1.. 5) ;
>
> is equivalent to
>
> @foo = (1, 2, 3, 4, 5);
>
>
>
> Is there similar shorthand to set @foo = (5, 3, 3, 2, 1) ? I know you can
> go
>
> @foo = reverse (1
John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 9/3/04 6:45 PM, Damian Conway wrote:
>> John Siracusa wrote:
I don't see how we could prevent someone from clobbering the global
definitions of PRE and POST to be no-ops if they wanted to. Seems to
me that the whole point of putting th
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>Care to explain what those are, O great math teacher?
>> What's a math teacher?
>
> It's th
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer wrote:
>> The infinite thread
>> Pushing onto lazy lists continued to exercise the p6l crowd (or at
>> least, a subset of it). Larry said that if someone wanted to hack
>> surreal numbers into Perl 6.1 then
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can't say I'm keen on making {...} special in strings. I felt that the
> $(...) and @(...) were a much cleaner and more general solution. The
> prospect of backslashing every opening brace in every interpolated
> string is not one I relish.
Maybe we co
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 11:00:39PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> : On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 19:35, Luke Palmer wrote:
> :
> : > The New Way (tm) to do that would probably be sticking a role onto the
> : > array object with which you're dealing:
> : >
> : > m
Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- 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 we all know, time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a
> banana. If you
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gautam Gopalakrishnan writes:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've tried the archives and the 'Perl 6 essentials' book and I can't
>> find anything
>> about string subscripting. Since $a[0] cannot be mistaken for array subscripting
>> anymore, could this now be used to p
"Jonadab the Unsightly One" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Different OO models
>> Jonadab the Unsightly One had wondered about having objects
>> inheriting behaviour from objects rather than classes in Perl 6.
>
> Urgle. I've complet
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Thanks in advance.
And thanks to Sebastian Riedel, Brent Royal-Gordon, Robert Spier and
the aforementioned Jeffrey Dik I have filled in my lacunae and I'm
ready to get my summary on when Monday rolls around.
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For various annoying reasons involving a pernickety external drive and
> a service centre that, after more than a week *still* hasn't taken a
> look at my main machine, I find myself missing a tranche of messages to
> perl6-inter
For various annoying reasons involving a pernickety external drive and
a service centre that, after more than a week *still* hasn't taken a
look at my main machine, I find myself missing a tranche of messages to
perl6-internals and perl6-language. If some kind soul were to send me
mbox files contai
chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Perl.com has just made A12 available:
>
> http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2004/04/16/a12.html
>
> Warning -- 20 pages, the first of which is a table of contents.
But it's all excellent good stuff. Well done Larry and Co. Now, if you
could all just hold off
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Cantrell writes:
>> A few days ago I briefly discussed with Nicholas Clark (current perl 5.8
>> pumpking) about making perl5 code forward-compatible with perl6. A
>> quick look through the mailing list archives didn't turn up anything
>> obvious, an
"Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think the ¥(yen) suggestion is great, especially since it does indeed
>> look like a zipper. Still, I would very much like an ASCII infix
>> alternative for zip().
>
>> I propose z as the ASCII alternative for the infix zip operator (either
>> broken
David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mar 22, 2004, at 5:02 PM, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> Try this:
>>
>> (cond
>> ((eq window-system 'mac)
>> (when (string= default-directory "/")
>> (setq default-directory "~/&q
David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mar 20, 2004, at 1:32 PM, Calle Dybedahl wrote:
>
>> You don't need Unicode display « and », just plain old ISO 8859-1.
>
> True, but I'd like to get Unicode working for other projects, as well.
>
>> They're characters number 171 and 187 there. And AF
Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:01:11AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
>>: That's a *very* interesting idea. What do people think?
>
>>I think anyone who does full justification without proportional
>>spacing and hyphenation is severely lacking in empathy for
Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> LW> This would be relatively straightforward for syntax highlighters,
> LW> I think. But Perl 6 will throw other curves at highlighters that
> LW> will be much more difficult to solve, such as
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> michael.firestone writes:
>> Is there somewhere I can get the entire perl6-language archive in a
>> tarball?
>
> I personally don't know, but there could be somewhere.
>
>> I am trying to work on turning the Apocalypses into story cards at
>> http://p6s
chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 22:26, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
>> So on the grand balance of utility, what are the metrics that traits are
>> supposed to help improve?
>
> Two big ones:
>
> - naming collections of behavior that are too fine-grained to fit into
"Joe Gottman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Luke Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 4:51 AM
> Subject: [perl] Re: Roles and Mix-ins?
>
>
>> David Storrs writes:
>> >
>> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 11:12:31AM -
Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Luke Palmer wrote:
>> Renaming methods defeats the purpose of roles. Roles are like
>> interfaces inside-out. They guarantee a set of methods -- an interface
>> -- except they provide the implementation to (in terms of other,
>> required methods). Ren
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Scott) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Austin Hastings) writes:
>
>>PS: While I'm somewhat sympathetic to the fact that eu guys are trying to
>>spin up 200 years worth of amendments and supreme court decisions at the
>>same time, it's still
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 09:30 PM 1/5/2004 +0000, Piers Cawley wrote:
>>Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > At 07:55 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
>> >>The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 10:55, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
>
>> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > I confess I wouldn't be
>> > surprised if, by the end of the year, we haven't seen the full
>> > implementation of at least
Melvin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 07:55 PM 1/5/2004 +0100, Lars Balker Rasmussen wrote:
>>The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > people's salaries will depend on Parrot. I confess I wouldn't be
>> > surprised if, by the end of the year, we haven't seen the full
Lars Balker Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Me? I think Perl 6's design 'in the large' will be pretty much
>> done once Apocalypse 12 and its corresponding Exegesis are
>> finished. Of course, the devil is in the details, but
Coo... you really can hear a pin drop in here.
Anyway, happy new year everyone.
--
Beware the Perl 6 early morning joggers -- Allison Randal
Michael Joyce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thank you for a lovely Christmas Present.
Any time.
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 10:36:01AM -0600, Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
> : I've been trying to follow the recent discussion on roles and
> : properties and traits and such, but there's something that bugs
> : me. If I understand correctly, adding a role at runti
"A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-16 11:57]:
>> bear in mind that the authors of the paper use the term
>> 'trait' for what we're calling a 'role' (We already have
>> traits you see).
>>
>> http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~bla
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 12:11:59AM +0000, Piers Cawley wrote:
> : When you say CHECK time, do you mean there'll be a CHECK phase for
> : code that gets required at run time?
>
> Dunno about that. When I say CHECK time I'm p
Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday, December 16, 2003, at 12:20 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote:
>> finally by default? None for me; thanks, though.
>
> I don't think so; we're just talking about whether you can extend a
> class at _runtime_, not _compiletime_. Whether or not Per
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 07:05:19AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> : Michael Lazzaro writes:
> : >
> : > On Sunday, December 14, 2003, at 06:14 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> : > >But the agreement could be implied by silence. If, by the time the
> : > >entire progr
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley writes:
>> The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > http://groups.google.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> This should, of course, read:
>>
>> h
The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Vocabulary
> If you're even vaguely interested in the workings of Perl 6's object
> system, you need to read the referenced post.
>
> Luke Palmer, worrying about people using Object related vocabulary in
> subtly inconsistent way
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 01:44:34PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 12:50:50PM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote:
>> : It seems to me there's an argument both ways --
>> :
>> : 1. Code written in the absence of a role won't anticipat
Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday, November 26, 2003, at 12:29 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
>> If you contrast it with an explicit try block, sure, it looks
>> better. But
>> that's not what I compare it with. I compare it with Perl 5's:
>>
>> $opus.write_to_file($file) or
1 - 100 of 534 matches
Mail list logo
