Tom Christiansen wrote:
Unless I'm very wrong, there are more whole numbers than natural
numbers. An induction should prove that there are twice as many.
We're probably having a language and/or terminology collision. By natural
numbers, I mean the positive integers. By whole numbers, I mean th
Tom Christiansen wrote:
[...]
The price of that consideration would be to give the Mathematicians
blank looks on *their* faces for a very long time instead. Certainly,
they'll be quick to tell you there are just as many whole numbers
as naturals. So they won't know what you mean by equal up there
Luke Palmer wrote:
Luke Palmer:
# The first thing I noticed was the == / eq distinction. This
# has been invaluable for scripting, but since Perl 6 is
# desiring to be more of a formal language, I'm wondering
# whether the distinction is profitable.
[...]
Brent Dax:
Your desired "standard sort
Larry Wall wrote:
[...]
[I wrote:]
: maybe it's because I don't think a
: function's arity is quite the same as it's *minimum* number of
: parameters? I mean, it makes sense in a functional language... but you
: don't have functions with a variable number of arguments there.
Sure, but one can
Damian Conway wrote:
Larry wrote:
On the other hand, I could see an argument that said anyone who
doesn't know what .arity means shouldn't be writing routines that
depend on it...
That was more or less my line of thought.
Now, I think I'll dare claim my English is not exactly bad for a 21
year-o
Nicholas Clark wrote:
[...]
> And what happens if I write
>
> %hash4 = ("Something", "mixing", pairs => and, "scalars");
1 23 4 5
Perl5 says "Odd number of elements in hash assignment at -e line 1."
And Perl6 should, too.
IMHO, your example isn't
Nicholas Clark wrote:
[...]
> If the compiler were able to see that my Date $bday = 'June 25, 2002';
> is one statement that both types $bday as Date, and then assigns a
> constant to it, is it possible to do the conversion of that constant
> to a constant $bday object at compile time? (and hence
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 12:00:55AM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
>> And I'm definitely going to try any future PerlGolf challenges also
>> in perl6.
>
> Is it considered better if perl6 use more characters than perl5? (ie
> implying probably less line noise)
> or less (getting
Piers Cawley wrote:
> Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
{...]
>> couldn't that be reduced to:
>>
>> m{^\s* $stuff := [ "(.*?)" | (\S+) ] };
>>
>> the | will only return one of the grabbed chunks and the result of
>> the [] group would be assigned to $stuff.
>
> Hmm... is this the first P
