Hi Andy! Maybe this helps (separate coding elements with parens and/or brackets, still get the same result):
> say 1, 1, * + * ...^ *>= 100; (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) > say 1, 1, * + * ...^ (*>= 100); (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) > say 1, 1, * + * ...^ ( * >= 100); (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) > say (1, 1, * + *) ...^ ( * >= 100); (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) > say 1, 1, * + * [...^] ( * >= 100); (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) > say (1, 1, * + *) [...^] ( * >= 100); (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) >From Yary: >> Ranges also support arbitrary functions, the doc page shows a Fibonacci number generator >> https://docs.raku.org/language/operators#index-entry-sequence_operator The Fibonacci code above (and in the docs) uses the sequence operator (infix ...), not the range operator (infix ..). To recap for Andy: Yary, Vadim, Brian, Fernando and Marc have posted code using the sequence operator; I've previously posted code using the range operator coupled with a grep() call [I recall reading somewhere that ranges are cheaper to construct than sequences, but can't locate the reference at the moment]. FWIW_1, I was unable to get the Fibonacci code to work with the range operator: > say 1, 1, * + * ..^ *>= 100; 11WhateverCode.new FWIW_2, I've had good luck grepping out composite sequences with the 'range_operator / grep' strategy: > #Using "(^*)" as a synonym for the range "(0..*-1)", see: https://docs.raku.org/type/Range Nil > ( 0..11 ).[ (^*).grep: * %% 2 ] (0 2 4 6 8 10) > ( 0..11 ).[ (^*).grep: * %% 3 ] (0 3 6 9) > ( 0..11 ).[ (^*).grep: * %% (2|3) ] (0 2 3 4 6 8 9 10) > ( 0..11 ).[ (^*).grep: * %% any(2,3) ] (0 2 3 4 6 8 9 10) HTH, Bill. PS Now to try to understand the differences (shown earlier in this thread) when the := binding operator is used! On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 7:15 AM Andy Bach <andy_b...@wiwb.uscourts.gov> wrote: > I "misread" > say 1, 1, * + * ...^ *>= 100; > > thinking "shouldn't it be '<=' as you want the total to be less than 100?" > but > $ raku -e 'say 1, 1, * + * ...^ *<= 100;' > ===SORRY!=== Error while compiling -e > Whitespace required before <= operator > at -e:1 > ------> say 1, 1, * + * ...^ *<= 100;⏏<EOL> > expecting any of: > postfix > > and > $ raku -e 'say 1, 1, * + * ...^ * <= 100;' > () > $ raku -e 'say 1, 1, * + * ...^ * >= 100;' > (1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89) > > So, then it dawned on me that the '>=' is "binding" (right word?) to the > "*" marking the end of the sequence as "until I am ge 100". Though that > doesn't quite work, > $ raku -e 'say 1, 1, * + * ...^ * <= 100;' > () > > Ah, I see, it does work. The end of the sequence is the first number less > than 100, so 1 succeeds. I guess the sequence never gets started. > ------------------------------ > *From:* yary <not....@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 24, 2021 8:39 PM > *To:* William Michels <w...@caa.columbia.edu> > *Cc:* Marc Chantreux <e...@phear.org>; raku-users <perl6-us...@perl.org> > *Subject:* Re: [better solution] pairs of separators from a string > > > *CAUTION - EXTERNAL: * > Hi Bill, > > When building a range that's an arithmetic or geometric progression, the > sequence operator is a little quicker to type. And thus also more likely to > be understood more quickly too. > > > ('a' .. 'h')[(0..*-1).grep: * %% 2 ] > (a c e g) > > ('a' .. 'h')[ 0, 2 ... * ] > (a c e g) > > > ('a' .. 'h')[(0..*-1).grep: * % 2 ] > (b d f h) > > ('a' .. 'h')[1, 3...*] > (b d f h) > > # Geometric example- powers of 2 > > ('a' .. 'z')[1, 2, 4...*] > (b c e i q) > > There isn't a simple translation for the is-prime example that I can think > of, that is a good use for "grep" > > Ranges also support arbitrary functions, the doc page shows a Fibonacci > number generator > https://docs.raku.org/language/operators#index-entry-sequence_operator > "This allows you to write > > say 1, 1, * + * ...^ *>= 100; > # OUTPUT: «(1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89)» > > to generate all Fibonacci numbers up to but excluding 100." > > > > -y > > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 6:36 PM William Michels via perl6-users < > perl6-us...@perl.org> wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > My understanding is that ranges are pretty cheap to construct, and in any > case, the range @x[0..*-1] is just the index of all elements in @x. The > .grep() approach may be most useful if you have a function (e.g. %, %%, and > .is-prime shown below): > > > (0...9) > (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9) > > (0...9)[0..*-1] > (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9) > > (0...9)[(0..*-1).grep: * ] > (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9) > > (0...9)[(0..*-1).grep: * %% 2 ] > (0 2 4 6 8) > > (0...9)[(0..*-1).grep: * % 2 ] > (1 3 5 7 9) > > (0...9)[(0..*-1).grep: *.is-prime ] > (2 3 5 7) > > > > You can find a related example in the docs ( > https://docs.raku.org/routine/grep#class_HyperSeq). Anyway, I'm sure each > approach has its fans, > > Best, Bill. > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 3:59 AM Marc Chantreux <e...@phear.org> wrote: > > hello everyone, > > I made a mistake while replying to all of us so anwsers never reached > your boxes. I'll summerize in one answer: > > Bill: > > > Is it just even/odd elements that you want to separate out? If so, maybe > > .grep() is your friend here > > I don't think it is: 0, 2 ... * seems to be > > * closer to what i have in mind when i think about the problem > (so i invoke readability there) > * probably more efficient than (0..*).grep(* % 2) that > * generate twice the number of required elements > * need to filter the result > > Also, trying to play with this version: > > my ($a,$b) = > .[0,2...*], > .[1,3...*] > with <AaBbCc>.comb; > > just don't work because the lists are squashed into scalar context > in the process. > > So Brian and Fernando made my day with := and the unexpected power of > the [] operator. > > my (@a,@b) := <AaBbCc>.comb[ [0,2...*], [1,3...*] ]; > > I really like how declarative it is. Also the use of := now seems > obvious to me. > > Sigils still remains something strange to me desprite all your examples > but i'll take some time. thanks everyone. > > marc > > *CAUTION - EXTERNAL EMAIL:* This email originated outside the Judiciary. > Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking on links. >
