In Perl 5:
my @a = (1,2,3);
my @b = @a[0..3];
print scalar(@b); # 4
But in Perl 6:
my @a = (1,2,3,4);
my @b = @a[1...]; # elements from 1 onward
say [EMAIL PROTECTED]; # should probably be 3, but with Perl 5 semantics
is Inf
We have to break one of these. I think
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:30:42AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> But in Perl 6:
>
> my @a = (1,2,3,4);
> my @b = @a[1...]; # elements from 1 onward
> say [EMAIL PROTECTED]; # should probably be 3, but with Perl 5
> semantics is Inf
In Pugs (r1847), after the IType refactoring, I hav
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In Perl 5:
>
> my @a = (1,2,3);
> my @b = @a[0..3];
> print scalar(@b); # 4
>
> But in Perl 6:
>
> my @a = (1,2,3,4);
> my @b = @a[1...]; # elements from 1 onward
> say [EMAIL PROTECTED]; # should probably be 3, but with Perl
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
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:08:43AM -0700, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> : @foo[1,3; *; 7]
> :
> : Which I rather like.
>
> Me too. Unless my memory is failing me, I believe that's what S09
> already specifies.
It does include a C> (d'oh, should've
