Re: A common event loop

imple'. And I can't imagine how this would work. Any statement could be interupted with an exception, but there is no mechanism to restart. This is just plain wrong. chaim -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, I

Re: The distinction between do BLOCK while COND and EXPR while COND should go

that's my block. For me the return takes away the thrust of the outside scalar context. chaim -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183

Re: The distinction between do BLOCK while COND and EXPR while COND should go

id perl4's and clearly I haven't run into something that depended upon this. I wonder how much it would hurt the -internals work. I think I'm not alone in wanting to make the list/array dichotomy go away. chaim -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL

Re: The distinction between do BLOCK while COND and EXPR while COND should go

pletely TC expected. To you perhaps. I feel that the syntactical change is unexpected. But do you any objectsions to making this limited change? When the EXPR of a return is a literal list, it should not have its comma changed? Will my proposal bleed into anything else in the language? chaim

Re: The distinction between do BLOCK while COND and EXPR while COND should go

change. I simply want that return (I'm not sure how to phrase this) be able to return only a scalar or an aggregate. It should be immune from having a scalar context pushed through from the caller and change the commas from a list seperator into the comma operator. chaim -- Cha

Re: RFC 178 (v1) Lightweight Threads

as to have protection. If you want the variable to be shared declare it. SWM Example 3: Closures (Ken's example) Aha, I get it. -internals has been assuming that one _must_ specify the sharing. You want it to be infered. I think that's asking for too much DWIMery. chaim -- Cha

Re: The distinction between do BLOCK while COND and EXPR while COND should go

(7,8,9,10) } $x = fn(); # $x == 10 chaim -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183

Re: RFC 120 (v2) Implicit counter in for statements, possibly$#.

yntax, JSD but I like the idea. If everything become objects under-the-hood, JSD then we could have: JSDfor $a (@array) { print "$a is at $a-index\n"; } JSD No, I'm not wild about that either, but it's an idea. -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Kn

Re: Threads and run time/compile time

d if every thread has to recompile all its own modules. SWM We could either discuss alternate approaches for RFC1, or I could SWM submit a new RFC for a thread architecture that gives me the SWM performance I want. -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL

Re: RFC 63 (v3) Exception handling syntax

ease. $SIG{DIE} should die. Action at a distance. Global. Can't know what other threads or modules want done here. chaim -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183

Re: errors and their keywords and where catch can return toand stuff like that

the object, then in the class for PS uncaught_handler. PS I think it's cool how this process is converging :-) -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183

Re: RFC 88 (v1) Structured Exception Handling Mechanism

overhead. chaim -- Chaim FrenkelNonlinear Knowledge, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183