Larry Wall wrote:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 12:27:38PM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
: Issues:
: * Limits lvalue substr (doesn't allow it to be a different size)
: unless splice is used (or a substr method is also provided).
That all has to be looked at anyway. What does "5" mean when
Juerd wrote:
Matt Diephouse skribis 2004-06-30 20:51 (-0400):
my $string = "Hello, World!";
say $string[0..4]; # prints "Hello\n"
$string[7...] = "Larry!";
say $string; # prints "Hello, Larry!\n"
And that "array" is one of bytes? graphemes?
I&#x
Alexey Trofimenko wrote:
I wonder about mixed synax:
%hash = ( :keyÂvalueÂ
:key2ÂvalueÂ
:key3
key4 => 'value',
'key5','value',
Âkey6 value key7 value )
Did I make mistakes here?
That depends. I asked Damian about this a few weeks ago. He said
Larry Wall wrote:
Actually, I've been rethinking this whole mess since last week, and
am seriously considering cranking up the Ruby-o-meter here just a tad.
At the moment I'm inclined to say that the *only* interpolators in
double quotes are:
\n, \t etc.
$foo
@foo[$i]
%foo{$k}
{
@array.each:{$^odd.bar() }:{ $^even.baz() };
Admittedly it's a much smaller case, but it should be useful, even if
I can't think of a non trivial case offhand.
--
matt diephouse
--
http://matt.diephouse.com
>
> Larry
>
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:36:05 -0700, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, that's precisely why I'm trying to generalize Ruby's single
> "magic" block into one or more ordinary parameters.
Excellent. :)
> Two anonymous adverbs? Hmm. While I can think of ways to force it to
> work, I'm inc
I recently got bit by C in Perl 5, which leads me to wonder
about Perl 6. C, when called without an expression, tries to
DWIM, returning an empty list in list context and undef in scalar
context, which is generally a good thing. But I came across this code
at work this week:
use CGI qw(:standa
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:38:48 -0500, Dan Hursh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> while another $foo {..}
>
> It's 5 characters too many, but it works.
>
> Dan
At this point, you may as well use C<.records> (think C<$/> -- record
separator):
for $foo.records { ... }
Then it'd be a small step to allo
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:52:18 +0200, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ouch. You have foo-bar-baz code *at work*? :)
Unfortunately, some of the code here is much worse than that.
> In fact, this was anticipated and the doesn't-exist case is explicitly
> documented as:
>
> If the parameter do
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:31:12 -0700, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's vaguely possible I could be persuaded on the basis that
>
> for zip @a ¥ @b <-> { ($^a,$^b) = ($^b,$^a) }
Shouldn't that be:
for zip @a, @b <-> { ... }
--or--
for @a ¥ @b <-> { ... }
?
--
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:49:46 -0700, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, a typo. Though it's not actually clear yet whether you have to
> write zips args with semicolons, which is why I partially switched
> to ¥ in midthink.
Just checking. I wondered if you'd introduced a new feature midt
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 22:17:22 -0700 (PDT), Jonathan Lang
> Agreed; that's why I'd include "last" for newbies to use. "0th" as "last"
> works only as an extension of "-1st" as "first from last", "-2nd" as
> "second from last", and so on; you have positive numbers counting from the
> first, and negat
I may be completely off base here, but I think this whole discussion
would be better suited for perl6-internals. A packaging system would
not be a feature of the language itself, but of its implementation.
Don't confuse Perl and perl.
--
matt
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 11:48:59 +, Herbert Snorrason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As it stands, though, perl6-internals isn't about perl, but Parrot ...
> so of the two lists, language is arguably more appropriate...
perl6-internals is about perl the implementation (which is parrot).
perl6-languag
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:45:17 +0200 (CEST), Michele Dondi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now I want to take a list of templates, say $t1, ... $tn and get the
> result of
>
> $result = pack $tn, ... pack $t2, pack $t1, @input;
>
> without actually writing the whole thing. To my knowledge and great
= ;
my @other = %hash;
(Those are written out for my own benefit; consider it a goodbye.)
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
. *shrug*
> And won't we just be doing:
>
> use CGI :standard;
>
> anyway?
Yeah, we will; I forgot. :-) I don't use Perl 6 very often (yet).
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
interpolate?
my $name = 'add';
my $code = q:c<«>[
sub «$name» ($left, $right) {
return $left + $right;
}
];
# prints "
# sub add ($left, $right) {
# return $left + $right;
# }
# "
Where you could whatever you wanted instead of «».
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
}
> ];
>
> After all, that's why we put \q interpolation into '' in the first place.
I missed that. Thanks.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
orth. I'm aware of how ridiculous many
of the things we (that includes me) say are, but perhaps I've said
something useful.
Hoping I haven't removed all doubt of my foolishness,
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 08:59:24 -0700, David Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Diephouse) wrote:
> >Supposing
> >class Filehandle does Iterate; # Iterate or Iterator?
> >we have an easy way to cr
quot;,
> $last, $first
> );
> }
>
> ...
> }
for @byid -> $patient { ... }
for %byname.kv -> $key, $value { ... }
???
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
and 0
> as the standard boolean values, or bool::true and bool::false?
I believe bool::true and bool::false are enums (so they are 1 and 0,
respectively).
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
he precedence table.)
> Or, if that's not quite sufficient:
>
> say map { .key.as(.value) }
> $num => '%d',
> $str => '%s',
> ...;
And this:
say [ $num => '%d', $str => '%s' ] >>.key.as(.value
believe that some of these can already be handled by C<.as()>.
I would like for this to be addressed. This is one item that has
always confused me about Perl 5.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
; > the replacement should be, though. Maybe it's not worth fixing.
>
> +"0x$_" # hex
> +"0o$_" # oct
> +"0b$_" # bin (does not exist in Perl 5)
Too bad sub names can't start with numbers:
0x $hex; # hex $hex
0x($hex);
0b $bin;
0o $oct;
That would make sense to me.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Diephouse skribis 2005-03-18 13:35 (-0500):
> > Too bad sub names can't start with numbers:
> > 0x $hex; # hex $hex
>
> But they can, if you call them prefix operators instead of subs. See
> also -e and alike operators
e don't need `splice` and
`substr` at all, but there are times when it's more convenient to
specify with a starting point and a length than with a range.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
about unicode if i don't want to.
And if I understand correctly, that means that I want everything to
use chars by default. And C<$string[]> would be a nice shortcut for
that.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
ntly saw some of this on Linux as well. I didn't go as far
as to define --icudatadir, but I noticed that passing no icu options
causes Configure.pl to autodetect icu. You might give that a shot.
Please consider patching the documentation if what you find there doesn't work.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
go with it.
Does this mean private methods will be called like this?
./:method()
FWIW, I like the original spec best. I'm not sure that the problems
with it aren't being exaggerated. But I've not written much Perl 6 yet
either...
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Wall wrote:
>
> > On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:22:07PM -0400, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> > : Does this mean private methods will be called like this?
> > :
> > : ./:method()
> >
> > No, I think th
to say whether or not this is
confusing with adverb pairs, but I love the colon for private
methods/attributes and it's the one thing separating your new thinking
from my ideal Perl 6 OO.
--
matt diephouse
http://matt.diephouse.com
n config file
+ extended support for gcc, icc, and other compilers
+ extended support for Solaris and other platforms
Thanks to all our contributors for making this possible, and our
sponsors for supporting this project.
Enjoy!
--
Matt Diephouse
"),
("1b", "2b"),
("1c", "2c") );
If you can, the only case where I could see [1, 2, 3] being necessary is
in a sub call where the parameters are wrapped in parentheses.
md |- matt diephouse
iguous situations like:
print (1, 2, 3), "\n";
I don't know how many times I've done that and wanted it to print
"123\n". I know it's a feature, but it can be a bug in my writing. Now
it'd be unambiguous:
print [1, 2, 3], "\n";
--matt diephouse
Damian Conway wrote:
BTW, in thinking about it further, I realize that Dan is going
to have to tackle this issue anyway. There's fundamentally no
difference in the exigencies of:
$junction = $x | $y | $z;
foo($junction);# Call foo($x), foo($y), and foo($z)
Damian Conway wrote:
matt diephouse wrote:
$junction = $x | $y | $z;
foo($junction);# Call foo($x), foo($y), and foo($z)
# in parallel and collect the results
# in a disjunction
Looking at that code, I&#
38 matches
Mail list logo
