Hello all.
I'm here mostly as a lurker to keep up with the evolving structure of
p6, but will try to contribute something useful when I can.
Good to be aboard.
Paul
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
ate methods if we can help it.
I think I need an exampleunfortunately I'm at work and haven't the
time to properly peruse the one you offered. Thus I must apologize, and
wait for more input.
Paul
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Are you speaking in terms of limitation, or requirement?
> > It would be nice to have a syntax solution. I've seen p5 interfaces
> > with stubs that die so that you have to override them in a
> > subclass. It works, but seems a little kludgy.
>
> Back in 1988 prog
> > And I'm coming in late on this. Are you saying you want
> > Exporter/%EXPORT_TAGS functionality built into the language and
> > into all objects? Wouldn't that jack up the overhead?
>
> No. All I'm saying is that this sort of construct:
>
>*{$_} = \&{"Class::$_"} foreach (qw(method metho
--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 5:02 AM +1300 3/6/03, Sam Vilain wrote:
> > *{$_} = \&{"Class::$_"} foreach (qw(method method2 method3));
> > Gives you everything that inheriting a class does, apart from the
> > ->isa() relationship. And potential unwanted namespace pollution.
>
--- Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Associations *are* fundamental things, but I don't think they are
> part of an object. They describe relationships between objects and
> should exist independantly and orthogonal to them.
Agreed. Is there any reason that shouldb't be done with somet
t;
> $x and $y $y if $x
> $x or $y$y unless $x
> $x . $y $y <~ $x
> $x ( $y ) $y ~> $x
I have no idea what you mean by this.
Paul
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
> I made a mistake in my original post, they definitely need to be
> left-associative. Your example should obviously be interpreted as:
>
> (.method given $x) given $y; # calls $x.method
ok.
> I think this is similar to how I mentioned that a duplicate 'for' is
> pointless. Just because poi
Just in case anyone cares, page 6 is requiring that I scroll
horizontally. I'll live, but if it can be easily fixed, that's a Good
Thing. :)
Haven't read the rest yet -- still working on it.
Paul
--- Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Like the fully-laden
--- Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> method x ($me: $req, ?$opt, +$namedop, *%named, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) { ... }
>
> Yikes. And I thought we were trying to get *away* from line noise?
>
> Seriously, can't we use something rather prettier, like this?
>
> method x($me: $req, $o
> The problem is that if you have multiple optional or named
> parameters, things start getting uncomfortably prolix, and default
> values end up a long way from their owners:
>
> multi substr(Str $str, $from is optional = $CALLER::_,
> $len is optional = Inf, $new is optional) {...
So now putting C-style comments in p6 should be about as easy as
macro circumfix:/*...*/ () is parsed(/.*?/) { "" }
That's so easy I might even *use* it, lol
Not that I've ever really felt the need with # and =doc/=cut.
But just to make sure I'm getting it:
macro circumfix:... () is pa
--- Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Coroutines end and DFG
> > Nobody explained what DFG stands for.
>
> It's a commonly used TLA standing for Data Flow Graph, which
> accompanies the CFG (Control Flow Graph). Both are necessary
> for register allocation
> I don't know that that means we couldn't have an C
> spelling, though. And C (or something easier to spell)
> for the * case. If we have C and C, I think
> it would be appropriate to have names for the other linenoise as
well.
I'd say "please".
> (Percentage of me that really cares: 20%.
> The sugar I'm using here is to go from
>
>$db.do_sql("select * from Foo");
> to
>$db.select * from Foo;
Since we're fishing, call it a circumfix operator, something like
sql...execute.
Like this:
$db.sql select * from Foo;
execute;
_
> I don't see a problem. Scalar == Int|Num|Str|Ref, so
> Scalar.isa("Int").
Scalar.isa("Int") && Int.isa("Scalar")
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
I apologize for not including a previous message thread -- I
fumble-fingered myself out of all the relevant ones
Still, I'd just like to cast my tiny vote regarding inferences.
I'd like to be able to write classes that can take advantage of
screaming speed, and types contribute.
I'd like to
> > Doesn't C give you this?
>
> Not really. A variable declared with can be accessed from
> anywhere in the program, just by redeclaring it or calling it with
> the "package::" syntax.A variable declared with can be
> accessed outside its scope only if the user returns a reference
> to i
ould be helpful if I set up a web page where the team could give me
some alternatives to post, and folk could submit their preferences.
I suspect that there are already plenty of ways to do that, and that my
offer is weak, lol Personally, I prefer just hashing it out in the
list. But it was a
> $a ??= $b :: $c;
Are you serious?
That's completely unnecessary, but so is
$a ||= 1;
I *LIKE* it!!! =o)
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com
> sub foo() {
> env $s ??= 0;
> $s ++ ;
> }
Although I still prefer calling it a trait on the data, I must admit
that I like "env"...perhaps even better than "is retained".
Well, maybe not. But it's a cool thought that it's the "environment".
__
tend to use esoteric language attributes rather often
(which is not a boast -- it's a rather bad habit, but there it is).
Anyway, I like writing functions and methods that DWIM, but sometimes
WIM takes some doing. I'd rather have a name that means something to
me, too though to b
--- Miko O'Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, David Storrs wrote:
> > Folks, give us your address (or a PO box, or something), where we
> > can send checks. The checks won't be tax deductible, but are we
> > really doing this for the tax deduction?
>
> ... or a PayPal acc
> sub foo($x ~= "foo") {...} # Append "foo" to whatever $x given
Oops. :)
That should be
> sub foo($x .= "foo") {...} # Append "foo" to whatever $x given
> sub foo($x ~= "foo") {...} # smart-test $x against "foo"
I assume the second would provide a boolean response.
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 10:44 AM -0800 3/25/03, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> > >So, is anyone working on a P6ML, and/or is there any
> > >discussion/agreement of what it would entail?
> >
> > I, for one, think it's a great i
(Note forwarded to the list as penance for my silliness. :)
> > > sub foo($x .= "foo") {...} # Append "foo" to whatever $x given
> > > sub foo($x ~= "foo") {...} # smart-test $x against "foo"
>
> Well, last time I looked (granted, it could've changed numerous times
> since then) ~ was the stri
> >> |==[*]|
> >> Sarcasmeter?
> >
> >lol -- I think my BS-o-meter just redlined, too
>
> Heh. Sorry 'bout that. Bring it to OSCON and I'll get it fixed. :)
lol -- when/where is that? (Seems all I do here is ask dumb questions).
*sigh*
>
--- Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 12:19:30PM -0800, Paul wrote:
> > Is there a page up anywhere that summarizes the latest
> > prognostications?
>
> Mike Lazzaro had compiled the state-of-the-ops for perl6, but I don't
&g
> > sub myprint(+$file is IO:File is rw ::= IO:STDOUT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) {...}
> As a side note... that sig will not do the behavior you've described.
> You instead want this:
> > sub myprint([EMAIL PROTECTED], +$file is IO:File is rw ::= IO:STDOUT) {...}
> The named parameter +$file has to go beh
--- Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However I still think we're probably multiplying entities
> unnecessarily.
A beautiful if somewhat understated reference to Occam's Razor.
While the synoptic synthesis of the writing of William of Occam is
often translated into English as "One should
y feel free to email me
off-list if it's more appropriate. ;o]
Paul
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com
things. :)
And FWIW, I consider this to be a very appropriate response -- an
aside, perhaps, but hey, the reason I asked the question was because I
care what helps and hinders other folk working on the list! ;o]
Paul
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com
--- Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 12:12:54PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> > Don't those return C, as opposed to the value of C<$_>?
> > I.E. wouldn't it be:
> >
> > $_ and return $_ given big_calculation();
> > -or-
> > given big_calculatio
> I'm looking for a Perl6 way to say that oft-repeated, oft-chained
> two-line snippet up there without declaring the temporary variable.
> Using C or C, maybe?
I think you're going to have to have some holding space, but $_ should
do it and still avoid the predeclaration. My P6 syntax is still
--- Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note if we are truly strict about C<==> always meaning "compare
> numerically", I imagine that the line:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] == [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>
> would in fact be identical to _this_ line:
>
> @a.length == @b.length;# or whate
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Likewise, I could argue that it be called C<=:\> (the "disgruntled
> muppet" operator?) since that reflects the "equals, under reference"
> symbology. But that's yucky.
Shouldn't that be ==:/ (maybe the "severely startled muppet" operator?
lol...)
--- David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> > I think newbies are going to unquestionably try and put the
> > parameters in the same order as they expect to see the eventual
> > arguments, and be durn confused it doesn't work --
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Likewise, I could argue that it be called C<=:\> (the
> > > "disgruntled muppet" oper
Error correction:
--- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > no idea how adverbial modification would affect that. Exactly
> > > what *would* adverbial assignment be? Would
> > > $a =:\ $b
> > > be like
> > > $a = \$b
Thatv should have been
--- arcadi shehter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Wall writes:
> >
> > Er, how would LEAVE detect that this was the *last* time you're
> > ever going to call this routine?
> >
> > On the other hand, if we renamed FIRST and LAST to ENTER and
> > LEAVE, then FIRST would become available
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Whipp wrote:
> > Joe Gottman wrote:
Getting deep -- sorry. :)
> > > Alternatively, there might be a new parameter type that indicates
> > > that the parameter is not evaluated immediately:
> > >
> > > sub infix:!! ($lsh, $rhs is deferred) {.
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > But what to do about matrix arithmetic and other simple
> > > threadable tasks?
> > > sub m_add(@a, @b) { my @result; my $i, $j; @result = @a;
> > >
--- "Adam D. Lopresto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I propose that since the empty pattern is no longer legal (and
> about time), we use "|" in patterns to indicate alternation without
> preference, and "||" to indicate "try the first, then the second,
> etc".
Hmm
A neat idea, but can you el
--- mlazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Austin Hastings wrote:
> > It has been pointed out once already that we already talked about
> > this, and I for one am in favor of the general version of it.
> > The original discussion posited an "adverbial comparison", viz:
> > C<$a eq:ref $b>. Which, l
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For anything other than existential issues, I believe that
> most arguments about the future containing the words "either",
> "or", "both", or "neither" are likely to be wrong. In
> particular, human psychology is rarely about the extremes
> of binary lo
--- Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[extremely large *SNIP*]
> Maybe the "|"/"||" distinction isn't needed, and we just need a
> declarator on rules that says they are side-effect-free, and can thus
> be optimized.
[snip]
> I like this solution better than making a new operator. In Perl
>
--- Matthijs van Duin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just said you can *compare* them, I didn't say test whether they're
> identical. Obviously comparing internal representations is a tricky
> business, and may have three results: "yes, the lists they generate
> are equal", "no, the lists they
allows the warnings::* functions
to detect the place in the caller list where the object was first used. If
"doit" is rewritten like this:
package abc ;
...
sub doit
{
my $self = shift ;
if (warnings::enabled($self)) {
#...
warnings::warn($self, "some message") ;
}
}
1 ;
the warning will be reported at this line
$a->dosomething() ;
That seems like the right thing to do.
Comments... please?
Paul
From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Sun, Aug 13, 2000 at 09:36:48PM -0400, Ronald J Kimball wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 13, 2000 at 09:04:41PM +0100, Paul Marquess wrote:
> > > I'm cc-ing this to p6 because there doesn't seem to be anyone left on
p5p.
&g
ffectively, it allows
> one to use
> the full power of Perl as its own, recursively applied, macro language.
>
> The Filter::Util::Call module (by Paul Marquess) provides a usable Perl
> interface to source filtering, but it is not nearly as simple as
> it could be.
>
> T
s is the *norm*, since newlines are just whitespace most
> places in Perl.
Aaah! I see where you are coming from now. Is that mentioned in the RFC and
module docs? If not, it really needs to be emphasised. It completely passed
me by.
If you like, next time I do a Filters release, I'll updat
y. Just because you write Foo::bar in your module doesn't mean
> > that Perl can't know which version of Foo:: you mean.
Has anyone considered the problems associated with XS code, or whatever
its replacement is?
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 10:43:38AM -0300, Branden wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone considered the problems associated with XS code, or whatever
> > its replacement is?
> >
>
> The big problem about having more than one version of a module
On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 02:47:55PM -0500, Steve Simmons wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> > Has anyone considered the problems associated with XS code, or whatever
> > its replacement is?
>
> Pardon my ignorance, but what's XS code?
perldoc perlxs
perldoc perlxstu
o globally override C warnings>...
This is what the -W command-line flag does.
> but it seems like we're right back to having to remember
> -w again.
Paul
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:02:40AM -0600, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> $obj->method; # Clearly void context.
Unless it's not. For example as the last statement in a subroutine.
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
gards to the
> concept of "nosideeffects".
By using a correct term, although it may be unknown to the average
programmer, the programmer is presented with an oportunity to learn, and
may even be exposed to a completely new programming paradigm.
And, by the way, it is already possible
's recent patch changes this for "do" at least.
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
sation and embellishment is allowed, but don't get too far off
the beaten track or people won't be sure which message they should post
next and then the thread will die.
[ :-) for those who like such things ]
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
pretty good track record with these sorts of
things.
Anyway, what do you think this is? Some kind of democracy?
:)
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
; # from the end backwards 10
$fh.seek(10, :relative); # from the current location forward 10
$fh.seek(-10, :relative); # from the current location backward 10
Paul
nsion also to say
$fh.pos += 10`bytes
as shorthand for
$fh.pos = $fh.cur + 10`bytes
Likewise for -=
But then that begs the questions of *= (not too nuts), /= (same),
%= (great for fixed length records?) and the predictable other ho
ult to the invocant ($_ =:= $?SELF) (which should be easy enough with
"method a ($_) { ... }").
method concrete {
./wizbang;
.foo for @.elems;
.foo for ./elems; # possibly odd looking - but not confusing
}
Please, lets pick something sane. Here I go speaking for the list, but I
don't think we will find many that think ".method syntax breaks in methods if
$_ is rebound" as a very sound concept.
Paul
irtual ($obj.y)
has %.y is rw; # implies %_y for storage, is virtual
Paul
ta => [$up, $right]);
OR assuming I has a Position object and a vector object
move(from => $pos1, delta => $vec1);
The original example just seems difficult to parse.
Paul
ble to do that, and maybe
to declare which hash keys or array elements are valid.
Do we have that already?
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> . . .
> -Such an "eigenmethod" is delegated to C<.meta> just as method like
> . . .
> +Such an I is always delegated to C<.meta> just as
changing "eigenmethod" to I should also change "an"
to "a":
+Such a I is always delegated to C<.meta> just as
^
Small
_.foo for @things_to_foo;
or something.
I like lining up my code as much as the next programmer, and probably a
lot more, but I just don't see the need for this syntax which seems
ugly, confusing and unnecessary.
But then again, as I said, I really don't see the problem that i
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 01:56:44PM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 5/1/06, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >But then again, as I said, I really don't see the problem that is being
> >solved.
>
> This "long-dot" can be used for many thin
; %foo {'bar'} >> DTRT, but I can't
> remember it", which certianly happens to me fairly often.
Well, I'd obviously quite like that ;-)
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
in
any Perl 6 development, discussions, or other activities. PerlNet exists to
provide support for the Perl community, and if there's anything I can do to make
it more suitable to help the Perl 6 effort, then I'd be very happy to do my best
to make it happen.
All the very best,
dard model can
take the small overhead hit of whatever internal shenanigans they need
to implement, and just about anything like that can be stuffed into a
module now, can't it?
So the upshot is, a standardized metamodel seems like the way to go to
me
And Congrats again, gramps. May y
How about one of these?
==
class Baz {
has $.a is restricted;
has $.b is controlled;
has $.c is unique;
has $.d is shared;
has $.e is queued;
has $.f is token;
...
}
--- John Drago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I asked this via the Google Groups interfa
--- John Drago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Mastros wrote:
> > I don't like the name synchronized -- it implies that multiple
> > things are happening at the same time, as in synchronized swiming,
> > which is exactly the opposite of what should be implied.
> > "Serialized" would be a nice n
--- John Drago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You mean "is parallel" as a synonym for "is async"?
>
> I think "is parallel" denotes something as usable by multiple threads
> simultaneously, "in parallel".
> "is serial" would denote that only one thread can use the $thing at a
> time, exclusively
--- John Drago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
. . .
> > class QueueRunner {
> >our sub process_queue(Code @jobs_in) {
> > my @ans is serial;
> > @ans.push map { async { &_() } } @jobs_in;
> > @ans;
> >}
> > }
> > my @answer = QueueRunner.process_job_queue( @jobs );
>
> Actual
--- Ashley Winters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/2/06, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > my @answer = map { async { &_() } } @jobs;
>
> That still seems too explicit. I thought we had hyperoperators to
> implictly parallelize for us:
>
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 03:51:45PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote:
> : { no threads;
> :print @_.ยป();
> : }
>
> It seems a bit odd to use a construct for its syntactic sugar value
> but take away its semantics...
>
>
so back to foo("bar"). What's the default behavior? String doesn't Num,
does it? though is does convert if the value is good
Does that mean foo("123") should or should not dispatch to foo(Int)?
Or even foo(Num), for that matter Oy, I could see some headaches
around setting these rules in
', '3', [ \[ '**', '4', '2' ], 0 ] ], 0 ], '5' ],
0 ];
I apologize that the expression parsing isn't a little more abstracted for
you, but the result should be usable. Also, the parse_expr is designed for
also parsing variable names in the TT2 language, so the first portion of the
method applies variable names. The entire thing could be cut down
considerably if all you want to parse is math (no variables).
Paul Seamons
I know, shoot me -- but just so we've discussed it and put it to bed,
maybe :if or _if or fi?
--- Aaron Crane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Wall writes:
> > Maybe we should just make statement modifiers uppercase and burn
> out
> > everyone's eye sockets. :)
>
> I like statement modifie
on that particular class.
No methods are removed.
This is very similar to read only strings.
Paul Seamons
that it shouldn't be too hard to change. The question is
would a patch to add the functionality be accepted if I went to the trouble
of figuring out how to do it?
Paul Seamons
Section of pge2past.tg that re-writes the expression to be enclosed by an if
block:
transform past (Perl6::G
so.
I'll be quiet if you'd like me to be, unless you don't want me to be. :)
Paul
better. :)
say "I'm ok"
if $i_am_ok
if $you_are_ok
while $the_world_is_ok;
Paul
overall readability.
I'd concede that the actual useful uses are rare enough to not warrant giving
a feature that could turn hopelessly ugly quickly - even if the current
generation of tools make it easy to add the feature.
Paul
n a commit bit and add a test to pugs.
Anyway. Once again if the alleged crime or the predicted crime is too great
then I concede. I can see that it could be abused by some. But that doesn't
mean I will abuse it.
Paul
PS. And not that it matters, but TT3 is planned to support nested statement
modifiers and my engine which does much of TT3 already supports them - and I
do use them on occasion - but that's a different mailing list.
ink that is workable.
But it also brings the question: If you can do it ugly [1] easily, why not
allow for it do be done prettily [2] ?
say $_ for =<> if $do_read_input
Paul
[1] It isn't really that ugly - just not as pretty.
[2] Arguably the "pretty" version is also m
r $a;
$x;
It isn't under Perl5 - but will it be under Perl6.
Either way the nested statement modifiers would work even if scopes aren't
introduced at each level.
.say for 1..$_ for 2..5;
I think it reads sort of nicely left to right.
Paul
est;
Which can obviously be written in other ways using other constructs, but not
without changing how the statement reads or changing what it emphasizes.
And as for Perl6 - well yes I'd love to see it get here more quickly also.
But I don't think that discussing little nitpicks like this are delaying the
release of Perl6. Maybe they are - but I would guess there are more pressing
issues that are occupying development time.
Paul
would remain unmodified.
Paul
ucinating.
Are you remembering this:
my $a = 1;
($a, undef, my $b) = 1..3;
If you attempted to do
my ($a, undef, $b) you'd get a warn error about re-declaring $a.
Paul
; as well.
In true chicken and egg fashion:
Which comes first the operator or the function.
Do you define &infix: in terms of &max or vice versa. My guess
is the operators should win because there could be some low-level shenanigans
that optimize things. But maybe not.
Paul
hen you use .rawkeys to get
> unordered--shades of PHP.
Taking a page from Template Toolkit.
.keys # same as perl5
.sort # the sorted keys
I know that it isn't quite parallel with Array.sort and it doesn't provide
for .sortkv or .sort pairs, but it might be an option.
Paul
nt languages I occasionally have to
search for that bug right now. Except it is spelled a little different with
if ($alpha = $beta) { ... }
When I really meant:
if ($alpha == $beta) { ... }
It is rare though. I think the == vs === will be rare also.
Paul
> foreach my $item (@items) {
> #process each item
> } else {
> #handle the empty list case
> }
>
> What do you think?
I'm not sure if I like it, but there have been several times that I would've
used it recently. I think it would certainly have utility.
Paul
es, if you don't get the aesthetics of the Schwartzian Transform,
then you should probably be using python or java anyway, hm?
Let's let Perl be Perl. It's a new Perl, but it's still a pearl. =o)
*Paul
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2007
as well - if the code doesn't compile, then perldoc would
not be able to generate the code - but it could always show an error that the
code doesn't compile and then show what poddoc would show.
The outcome is that poddoc can be Pod6 "pure" and perldoc can be (as its name
suggests) documentation for Perl.
Just my opinions.
Paul Seamons
y want a 7000 ft view (aka the executive summary).
Paul
extract the POD
tags ala poddoc and then add the inlined/introspectable documentation for
that particular language.
Now the "only" hard part is getting the other language designers to allow
ignoring pod markup in their languages. All of the Parrot based variants
could easily incorporate this feature.
Paul
1 - 100 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
