On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:39, Larry Wall wrote:
Aaron Sherman writes:
: If {} goes away in Perl6, then everything you've heard about Perl6 being
: not really all that different from Perl5 is either a lie or a damned
: lie. People keep saying it's just Perl5, but instead of syntax X, you
:
If the new, spiffy features of Perl6 are out of my reach that 60-80% of
the time, and I have to use perl5compat -nle ..., then the usefulness
of this new language will be largely lost on me.
I'm not sure I follow. What hypothetical features are you talking about
here? From what I've seen,
Aaron Sherman:
perl -MNet::Ping -nle 'print Ghost DHCP lease: $1
if /lease\s+(\d\S+)/
! Net::Ping-new(icmp)-ping($1)' \
/var/state/dhcp/dhcpd.leases
This becomes
perl -MNet::Ping -nle 'print Ghost DHCP lease: $1
if /lease\s+(\d\S+)/
!
Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:17:38PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
Aaron Sherman:
nice du -a | sort -n | tail -300 | tac | perl -nle '
die Require non-zero disk size!\n unless $ENV{DF};
if ($. == 1) {
Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley:
Well, no. Because Perl 6 is specified as behaving like perl 5 until
told different. Which means that the first translation you give would
be a syntax error.
Ouch. Guess I need to go reread A1. Anyway, that makes it easier -
then there
At 2:33 PM +0100 4/7/02, Piers Cawley wrote:
Jonathan E. Paton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but wait, there's more... what does:
@multi_dim[$a][$b][$c]
give?
Who cares? So long as the intermediate results in
@multi_dim.[$a].[$b].[$c] respond to [].
Hrm. Will they need to? That could
but wait, there's more... what does:
multi_dim[$a][$b][$c]
give?
Who cares? So long as the intermediate results in
multi_dim.[$a].[$b].[$c] respond to [].
Hrm. Will they need to? That could arguably pass a three
element key ($a,$b,$c) to multi_dim which, conveniently
being
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 2:33 PM +0100 4/7/02, Piers Cawley wrote:
Jonathan E. Paton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but wait, there's more... what does:
@multi_dim[$a][$b][$c]
give?
Who cares? So long as the intermediate results in
@multi_dim.[$a].[$b].[$c] respond to [].
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 13:01, Jonathan E. Paton wrote:
I'm I beating this point to death, or do I have to write
the RPC:
Keep the {} and [] notation for hashes and arrays
or
Save our array!
Let's boil this RFC down to one short phrase:
If {} goes away in Perl6, then everything you've
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 13:01, Jonathan E. Paton wrote:
I'm I beating this point to death, or do I have to write
the RPC:
Keep the {} and [] notation for hashes and arrays
or
Save our array!
Let's boil this RFC down to one short phrase:
If
I'm I beating this point to death, or do I have to write
the RPC:
Keep the {} and [] notation for hashes and arrays
or
Save our array!
Let's boil this RFC down to one short phrase:
If {} goes away in Perl6, then everything you've heard
about Perl6 being not really all
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 02:50:55PM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
Also, just wondering:
$_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_
does that work the way I expect it to?
Well, my internal Perl 6 parser hadn't been used all that much, but if
you expect this to be a syntax error, then I think you're
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:56:11PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Also, just wondering:
$_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_
does that work the way I expect it to?
Dunno, what do you expect it to do?. To my way of thinking there's
going to be a syntax error at the third '_'. But I'm not
Mark J. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:56:11PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Also, just wondering:
$_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_
does that work the way I expect it to?
Dunno, what do you expect it to do?. To my way of thinking there's
going to be a
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 14:56, Piers Cawley wrote:
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, just wondering:
$_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_
does that work the way I expect it to?
Dunno, what do you expect it to do?. To my way of thinking there's
going to be a syntax error at
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 15:09, Mark J. Reed wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:56:11PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Also, just wondering:
$_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_
does that work the way I expect it to?
Dunno, what do you expect it to do?. To my way of thinking there's
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 15:12, Piers Cawley wrote:
Mark J. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:56:11PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
$_[_][EMAIL PROTECTED] _=_0_-_
$_.[_()] _ @_._() _= _0_() - _()
[...]
This is where my interpretation fails because the result of
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:01:57PM +0100, Jonathan E. Paton wrote:
To make the symbols {} and [] aggregate you'd have to
default [] to using hashes - and force it back to
arrays using explicit syntax. You can't automagically
decide that it's never going to be used like a hash.
I'm I
Aaron Sherman writes:
: On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 13:01, Jonathan E. Paton wrote:
:
: I'm I beating this point to death, or do I have to write
: the RPC:
:
: Keep the {} and [] notation for hashes and arrays
:
: or
:
: Save our array!
:
: Let's boil this RFC down to one short phrase:
:
$a is a hash key
$b is an array index
$c is another hash key
So, if I try:
multi_dim[$b][$a][$c]
then it's obviously going to break. But how can I, the
programmer, easily spot that? It's not as clear as:
multi_dim{$a}[$b]{$c}
where I can see what I'm getting as I work through the
data
As to the inspring issue about using [] for hashes, I say go for it if
(and only if) it is a signifigant improvement for the parser.
I would imagine it's not. The braces are one of the things that make Perl
feel like Perl. My original post that inspired this gigantic discussion
was simply
I know this is going pretty far back in the design process, but I was
wondering why we're using curlies for hash subscripts, now that the %
sticks around when you key it. Then curlies could only two
things : Anonymous hash making and closure making. Maybe it's just too
much culture
but wait, there's more... what does:
multi_dim[$a][$b][$c]
give?
It's representation hiding. I can change my layout from hashes to arrays
without the clients of my code having to know. :)
Seriously, the above argument might actually hold some merit when changing
a matrix to a sparse matrix
but wait, there's more... what does:
multi_dim[$a][$b][$c]
give?
It's representation hiding. I can change my layout from hashes to arrays
without the clients of my code having to know. :)
Seriously, the above argument might actually hold some merit when changing
a matrix to a
Jonathan E. Paton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but wait, there's more... what does:
@multi_dim[$a][$b][$c]
give?
Who cares? So long as the intermediate results in
@multi_dim.[$a].[$b].[$c] respond to [].
--
Piers
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of
25 matches
Mail list logo