>
> All I'm doing is suggesting another way, one that makes more sense for
> beginners:
>
> $a = length @b;
>
> I think we're going to have to see prototypes extended to cope with
> functions like this, anyway. I'll mention this requirement in the
> next version of the RFC.
>
> Nat
Loo
Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> With the enhanced C operator, subroutines can dynamically decide
> what to return.
With context-based polymorphism, the decision can be made staticly.
>
>> Is there any mileage in extending the syntax to allow the contents
>> of an array or hash to be checked. In general I find quite often
>> that I am checking to make sure that an array has at least N
>> elements (ignoring issues with sparseness) and that a hash has a
>> s
With a tied scalar, does perl5 access its routines
twice when it does a += ?
I think the lvalueable subroutine should get called twice
in the example, first the left-hand and then the right-hand
Nathan Wiger wrote:
>
> Damian Conway wrote:
> >
> > The lvalue accessor *shouldn't* be d
>From rfc 98:
> =head2 acceptable coercions
>
> When resolving which method C to call in a context CTXT, and there
> is no method C defined for the context CTXT, Perl will examine
> the types listed in C<@CTXT::ISA{OVERLOAD_CONTEXTS}> for a list
> of other contexts
> to see if C can produc
Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> As a thought guide: think of C returning a reference to its
> argument, and the call to lvsub() performing a dereference.
Thought guide? Given a macro language and reference reasonablizing,
this looks like you've just compeltely defined lreturn!
macrod
Graham Barr wrote:
>
> I would add to that, that as long as the addition of this does not effect
> the performance of calling the methods that want the "relaxed perl5-ish"
> semantics.
>
> Graham.
The IMPLEMENTATION of the rfc97 working document (unfortuneately
not web accessible, I may chang
It will run faster, because it doesn't have to evaluate
the want(). (97,98) doesn't invalidate the current way of doing
things, it just gives a new way. And in syntax that is currently
erroneous.
Nathan Wiger wrote:
>
> > And what will aSub decide is it's context?
> >
> > @foo = (1
Hildo Biersma wrote:
>
> > The other way C++ allows you to overload a named function is
> > by return type. This document is a companion piece to
> > a similarly named one about protoypes. It replaces old Perl's
> > "wantscalar" and "wantarray" kluges, which can now be deprecated,
> > with a cl
