If you're asking for an explanation of the humour, then it's easy. There
is no word play or a significant reference to a program only available
to a special audience.
Seems to me that when Damian got to the end of his email he noticed that
each sentence ended in a '?'
That's not usual. Most emails contain assertions and questions.
The humour is really when he appended a "?" to his own name. Was he
really questioning what he was called?
Richard
On 08/23/2011 02:19 PM, philippe.beauch...@bell.ca wrote:
Help us always-explains-the-joke-man!!...
:)
Philippe R. Beauchamp
Secure Channel | Bell Business Markets
Associate Director - Application Services
Phone: 613-781-8953
Cell: 613-327-6928
----- Original Message -----
From: Moritz Lenz [mailto:mor...@faui2k3.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 04:56 AM
To: perl6-langu...@perl.org<perl6-langu...@perl.org>
Subject: Re: [perl6/specs] a7cfe0: [S32] backtraces overhaul
Am 23.08.2011 10:46, schrieb Damian Conway:
It's a trivial point, but why hidden_from_backtrace instead of
hidden-from-backtrace? Especially given that the associated
method is is-hidden, not is_hidden?
The current stance seems to be that low-level things are spelled with
underscores, while we reserve the minus character for user-space code.
Try grepping the specs for identifiers of built-ins that have a minus in
it -- I didn't find any in a quick search.
And why is this entire message written in questions?
Is it? I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean.
See
https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/a7cfe02002f665c120cf4b735919779820194757
maybe it's a charset problem on your machine, or something.
Cheers,
Moritz
